Wendy Gonaver, a Cal State Fullerton American Studies and Women's Studies adjunct instructor fired for asserting her free speech right to state her opposition to California's "loyalty" oath, has made the UK's Guardian newspaper.(1) The paper reported her case while reporting on the effort by the California Senate to repeal part of the oath.

The status of Wendy's struggle with CSU-Fullerton is still in doubt, with negotiations ongoing between the university and her pro bono counsel at People for the American Way. But according to the Guardian, the California Senate approved the repeal of sections allowing the firing on state employees who are members of the Communist Party. It was "a 24-15 vote, with Democrats in support and Republicans opposed," reports the Guardian.

But check out what one of your honorable state senators had to say in opposition to the partial repeal:

Republican senator Jeff Denham warned: "the Communist party is not a dead organisation ... and [is] actively repressing human beings in Cuba and China in brutal ways.

"The state has every right to hold school employees accountable for their political standing, especially if that employee belongs to an organisation that favours the violent overthrow of the government," Denham said during the debate on the bill.

Denham said that it's also "reasonable that use of public school property should be limited to groups who support our democracy and do not advocate the overthrow of government by force, violence or other possible means."

I think that with domestic friends like Senator Denham, the Constitution needs few enemies. What exactly are "other possible means" Mr. Senator? You know, Senator, Jefferson himself famously argued that the "tree of liberty" would have to be "refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." He explicitly included our own government as an occasional target of productive rebellion.(2) It seems you would fire Jefferson--and not for his advocacy of slavery but rather for his advocacy of freedom.

NOTES:

1. My thanks to my friend Nabil back in Virginia for alerting me to the Guardian piece. Cheers buddy!

2. Thomas Jefferson to William Smith, November 13, 1787. The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd, ed.,  v.12, p.356.

Cal State Fullerton fired Wendy Gonaver (an adjunct professor) last fall in what--in my opinion--was a flagrant violation of her first amendment rights. She identifies as a Quaker and a Buddhist and she needs your support:

"Please consider adding your name to this online petition (http://www.kintera.org/site/apps/ka/ct/contactcustom.asp?c=feIJKQMEF&b=4119631) asking California State University to adopt a policy at all of its campuses that allows for employees to submit addendums to the State Loyalty Oath. For those of you who don't know, I was fired last fall for attempting to exercise my First Amendment rights at Cal State Fullerton. Thank you for your consideration! Please forward this link to anyone you know who might be interested. -Wendy"

To learn more, here are the major stories in order of their publication (though there has been lots of media and blog traffic on this too):

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-oath2-2008may02,0,6280956.story
http://www.progressive.org/mag_mc050608
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-oath9-2008may09,0,3786001.story

Wendy will appear on Pacifica Radio's "Uprising" program this Wednesday as well as on NPR, but she needs your help to reduce the significance of this awful Cold War hold-over that never should have become law in the first place.

Please sign the petition.

...is the sound of the Democrats continuing to eat their own... it is ground hog day ... everyday is like yesterday ... munch munch munch... My post about Pennsylvania remains true on the eve of North Carolina and Indiana: McCain wins. And Clinton cannot become the nominee without splitting the party. And she is willing to split the party. No matter how people vote tomorrow, McCain wins as he gets to extend his holiday from criticism and as he gets free opposition research from Clinton and her surrogates who make sure they define Obama in the weakest terms possible. Munch munch munch. All the news is old news.

Chican@s Unid@s is a group of activists mainly in the North County that I work with--friends who show skill and devotion to the city and Chicano culture without seeking the perquisites of office and money... the way cool sort who do things because it is part of an identity of progressivism: here's their website. The photos from 2007 are mostly from the June 11 rally for peace in the streets of Santa Ana. Albert M., the Castillo brothers, Tessa, and the rest: I'm adding this link to my links on the left.

Here's why I think grassroots groups should stay out of electoral politics, even at the local level. The benefits never equal the risks, and occasionally the effort to take sides in some electoral contest or other damages the group's unity and effectiveness. Electoral politics is a rigged game--legally rigged by money and  complex organizational networks that insulate the power from the electorate. We need something much more sweeping than an electoral campaign if we are going to accomplish greater changes. Building the social networks for such a movement when or if the opportunity to maneuver comes in the form of a crisis in the legitimacy of the existing relations of power is what grassroots groups are for.

Vote as often as you like. I do... frequently. But keep grassroots organizing out of the hands of electoral politicians. Don't even unofficially send them your hard-earned community credibility. Let them earn their own cred.

A book I have been recently reading and teaching that offers one set of perspectives on how electoral politics can hinder more sweeping change is Piven and Cloward's 1979 "Poor People's Movements: Why they Succeed, How they Fail." Piven and Cloward argue that the New Deal in the 1930s bought off the groundswell of laboring people by seeming to offer hope of radical change inside the existing electoral-corporate system. But the real result was to demobilize the people and save the order that had produced the Depression in the first place.

One last debate before the April 22 primary in Pennsylvania. One last chance for Democrats to help McCain win time to redefine his public image and get free opposition research courtesy of the Clinton camp. They didn't fail. Still chewing in their effort to eat their way through their candidate and out of their best chance at defeating their more right-wing adversaries, the over-confident Democrats have paused from their meal only long enough to check their "Road Map to Defeat" before April 22 and ensure they are still headed toward nowhere.

My prediction for the April 22 Democratic primary can't go wrong: John McCain wins.

She can't win the Democratic nomination without dividing the Democratic Party at the national convention. And she is preparing the ground for that division--because Clintonian "triangulation" has always been about personal victory, not about actual progress.

As I wrote here on March 6, "The Democrats will be eating their own for weeks to come." It is getting worse, and it will get worse yet. They're still chewing.

The visual metaphor of the season, however, is not "chewing." It's a near-wreck, recovered just in time. But the recovery is not a Democratic recovery, it is a metaphor for the Republicans and John McCain. McCain is the great beneficiary of this latest Clinton wreckage, as this article argues. How the Clintons hold onto the loyalties of Democrats is beyond me. But I have never joined that party. It is over-rated by "Progressives" and "Liberals" alike. Hell, for about a month, Clinton has been campaigning for John McCain.

Now that's triangulation!

This came to me from a friend in Virginia who specializes in Middle East Studies and is an expert on the Iraq War. Since, he asks us to share... here it is... despite the fact that I'm trying not to write or think about the election much:

One of the Green Party candidates for President is Cynthia McKiney, the former Democratic congresswoman from Georgia. This is her campaign announcement, which I pulled from her campaign website at: http://www.runcynthiarun.org/



Notice how strongly she indicts the Democrats and what for and ask yourself if a Green insurgency voiced in these terms will work as well against Obama as it will against Clinton.

While I was away camping with my daughter and her schoolmates and families in Malibu at the Leo Carillo State Beach, I received about 70 emails and three pieces of welcome news.

The first is the best, it seems that La Escuela Freire (a proposed public charter school in Santa Ana) may have a location in which to begin operations in late 2009.

The second is this announcement I received from Susan Luévano, which looks very intersting:

"The Orange County Mexican American Historical Society (OCMAHS) will
sponsor the second annual Barrio History Symposium at Goldenwest Community College on
May 17, 2008."

And the third and last is this video link from the ever wonderful MFSO of OC, whihc for me arrived on the fifth anniversary of this awful Iraq War:

OCPC Silent Peace March, Huntington Beach, CA USA
YouTube Vid:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pGRvLtXP5g

It's good to know there is a still a struggle against these policies of this administration...

j

Since the late 1990s I have been buying as much of my coffee, clothes, shoes, and other items through "fair trade" outlets, such as Equal Exchange. Fair Trade Certification of a product means that the workers--in Mexico, Kenya, or Palestine--have livable wages, democratic control of their work places, more ecologically sound working conditions, and more cash with which to develop their communities as they see fit. This video was made to promote fair trade. It is a pretty good primer on the idea.

Fair Trade is a critically important "sunken road" to a more democratic future globalization, and promoting it and and discussing other forms of genuine "bottom up" democratic action in the world is the whole reason I type anything into the livejournal. It has been almost ten years since the "Fair Trade Certified" label was launched. In ten years the market has grown rapidly. Look for the label, a black and white rectangle with the words "fair trade certified" on it. Electoral politics is a drag these days. Things will not change all that much if Clinton, Obama, or McCain is elected president. And voting Nader won't help either. The fact is that without mass social movements driven by ordinary people, there would have been no New Deal and no Great Society.

Revolutions are not made from above; they're made from below. The Civil Rights Movement was a case in point. It is just like a Presidential candidate (pace Clinton) to argue that it takes a president to make the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act in 1964 and 1965. And it is just like our current America, with its leader worship, to respond that it was Martin Luther King jr. who made the movement. In fact it was tens of thousands of ordinary people who worked for decades. And there were numerous less-noted leaders, including Ella Baker and the amazingly wrongfully forgotten black labor union leader A. Philip Randolph.

Cesar Chavez and Delores Huerta did not make the movement, they brilliantly facilitated it.

Major change takes a mass movement. Fair Trade and the discussions it enables might be such a resource. And giving your cash to one of these producers sure beats giving it to the corporate giants that are driving the global race to the bottom in wages, ecology, and human rights.

[beginning 11:22am]
Yesterday I took a group of six students to Santa Ana to see the Jose Casas play "14" at the El Centro Cultural de Mexico. The play will continue through this coming Saturday. It is well worth the money ($15).

Your money will go to support the "Breath of Fire Latina Ensemble," which has won awards this year.

"14" is a set of dramatic reflections on race and ethnicity and prejudice in contemporary America, set against the death of 14 immigrants who died in a single incident, trying to cross the Arizona desert in May of 2001. As the play write, Jose Casas says in the program, "that day I knew I had to speak out about the issue of immigration. From that realization a series of interviews commenced and the project expanded into reflections on race in America.

The performances were convincing, emotional, and usually directly or indirectly political. Experiencing them in the small and basic but effective performance space El Centro has created is sometimes very moving. The cast (April Ibarra, Daniel Penilla, Elsa Martinez Phillips, and Juan E. Carrillo) were wonderful. I found myself looking through the program to figure out how they could manage to feed themselves. They were too competent, too effective as actors. I did not understand how they could survive on small performances such as this one, wonderfully well-written as it is. The fact is that they all have other jobs and have devoted years to their craft in some cases. And it showed.

I, my students, Tish Leon and Deborah Vasquez (whom I bumped into at the show) all enjoyed it. My friends... go check it out.

There are at least two performances left this Friday and Saturday at 8pm. Call 714.540.1157

[end 11:36am]]

The Democrats will be eating their own for weeks to come. I am checking out of that show. I've spent a lot of time following its details, and I had hoped the pro-war Democrat--Hillary Clinton--would be out of the race by now so there might be something to vote for. That won't happen and the train wreck that elects  a pro-war Republican--McCain--is under way and hard to watch. I don't need the irritation. Looking around on the internets I wandered into YouTube and found this old clip of the Clash. In my mind it summoned the election immediately and my new sense of distance from it. Bub-bye!

But really this is all just an excuse to post the coolest live performance clip of the Clash I have ever seen. If you don't get blown away you're deaf and blind my friend. ... I grabbed some of the lyrics off another internet site... something about everyone for sale or getting killed or shuffled out through the kitchen just calls to mind the election and the death of authenticity it brings back around every time ... Magnificence! ...

"...Karl marx and Fredrich Engels Came to the checkout at the 7-11 Marx was skint - but he had sense Engels lent him the necessary pence What have we got? yeh-o, magnificence!! Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi Went to the park to check on the game But they was murdered by the other team Who went on to win 50-nil You can be true, you can be false You'll be given the same reward Socrates and Milhous Nixon Both went the same way - through the kitchen Plato the Greek or Rin Tin Tin Who's more famous to the billion millions? News flash: vacuum cleaner sucks up budgie Oooohh...bub-bye Magnificence!!"

I thought Santa Ana's Renaissance Plan was a bad idea and wrote about it here--in obscurity--while others at The Orange Juice!, the Liberal OC, and Notes from the Banana Republic wrote about it in some cases better and in all cases with an actual readership. I don't write this for a "readership"--just to clarify my own thoughts and share them with the few people who occasionally read this and might comment. The Renaissance proposal will likely return. So I am reposting a revised version of my criticisms of it as well as my counter-proposal that I originally posted on December 27th under the title "Democratic development instead of 'Renaissance' in Santa Ana."

The Renaissance Plan attempted an aggressive reformation of the community, flowed from some profoundly wrong-headed ideas, and showed little respect for who and what the more organically, historically-produced community actually is. It is on hiatus; but it will be back in some form, and I want to share some thoughts relevant to community based responses to any renewed city-developer-sponsored return of the Renaissance.

A real democratic and sustainable and innovative long term plan would be a bold stroke for the city. But instead the Renaissance Plan when it returns will likely still attack the identity of the city it is meant to serve. The planners have assumed that what the city currently is needs a radical infusion of something from outside that contradicts its historic developmental path. Thus, in return it will probably make some superficial compromises with carefully identified interest groups in the city, but the proposed Renaissance, or "rebirth," of the town will still displace it for "something" new. Judging from the former plan, that "something" is assumed to be whiter and wealthier than the current demographics. That "something" commutes and does not work in manufacturing or other working class employment, such as in the service sector. The Renaissance Plan presumed that what is wrong with Santa Ana is that it is too working class and too unlike some of its Orange County neighbors.

An example of the mistaken assumptions in Santa Ana's planning can be seen in the proposal to rebuild the decades-ago lost "street cars" or trolleys. The hope is to connect the train station with the downtown, as a service to commuters and a draw for tourists. That idea is too expensive for a commuter service and not likely to be executed well as historic restoration. The trolley rebuilds I have seen mostly fail to re-create the "lost" history because they end-up needing to do it on the cheap, instead of doing it well.  We'll be left with "street cars" that are essentially gussied-up buses. They'll be slower and smaller than commuters need and so totally unlike the lost trolley system that only a very foolish tourist would see any history in it.

Changing the assumptions about how to develop the train station's connection to downtown (and the rest of the city) begins what I think is a better discussion of how to re-imagine the "renewal" plan in a way that respects and builds upon the complex identity Santa Ana currently has. I would shift the public discourse to a significant counter assumption: Santa Ana is a genuine urban space--a city of the masses. From that assumption, I say that since buses serve the masses and buses are cheaper, build a truly distinctive bus system that enhances the city's economy, reputation, and quality of living. I'd suggest that Santa Ana develop the quickest, cheapest, cleanest bus system in Southern California. Run such a line down a designated lane from the train station to downtown and you'll have the commuter benefits of the trolley system, the prestige of supporting cutting edge clean technology, and the reputation for the smarts to adapt your plans to the realities of your community.

This is not pie in the sky ecology. There is a movement for clean technologies that has a real economic future, and it looks a bit like some of what I just proposed. A renewal plan for Santa Ana that made more sense might provide incentives for companies that are developing clean technology to locate in the city's existing industrial zones. But, instead, the Renaissance Plan's assumptions would have--and likely still will when revised--set in motion the slow death of at least one industrial zone and Santa Ana's central Latino business zone, in favor of upscale housing and boutiques. Checkout Van Jones up in Oakland to get a sense of the possibilities of what I suggest. Imagine what could be done in Santa Ana. The city has the labor, a pollution problem that cleaner technology might help, the industrial capacity, and the zoning mostly already in place.

Changing the assumptions from displacement of the city's identity to enhancing it, instead of tilting at windmills with streetcars, would also represent better longterm historic preservation planning. Why doesn't Santa Ana preserve more of what it already has? In recent years, the preservation and restoration rage has been for the oldest in Santa Ana: the housing infrastructure built before WWII that makes the town distinctive because there is so much of it compared to other OC cities. But the Renaissance Plan attacked some of this infrastructure and totally lacked foresight on other later buildings.

One day structures from the 1950s and 1960s, especially commercial structures, will also be notable historical assets. To a careful eye, they are right now: who else in Southern California built as many of these later art deco inspired buildings?  Will somebody please make a huge donation to the Santa Ana Historic Preservation Society and get them on a serious program of preservation instead of being limited to preserving a couple houses and otherwise cannibalizing housing around the city just ahead of the wrecking ball.

So my proposal would be, in part, to get the city onto a unique development path that rightly assumes its current demographics and infrastructure are strengths. Such assumptions could yield a program of historic protection and sustainable development that would make Santa Ana newly distinctive regionally, nationally, and internationally by building on what it already is. One day what could be attractive about the city are the very things too many people fail to appreciate right now. One day what might be attractive are the very things the Renaissance Plan partly attacked: postwar architecture, industrial zones, and a mix of working class and middle class communities. The clean technology of the twenty-first century will in many cases manifest itself as relatively light industry, housed in smaller production and development units. Imagine old warehouses and manufacturing facilities reborn, renovated for newer production requirements. Better not let it all go the way you let the trolley cars go because once gone it cannot really be gotten back.

I know there are at least two community organizations out there in Santa Ana with designs on the eighty-year-old YMCA building in downtown. If they are not ready with a proposal, they may soon lose-out.

The Orange County Register is reporting that the City of Santa Ana is considering a proposal to give the YMCA building to a developer in exchange for a possible $14 million investment to renovate the building.

The estimated value of the building is $9-10 million. The lead partner for the developer, Giachino Development Co., is a man named Jack Dangelo. Arellano Gustavo, at the OC Weekly's "Notes from the Banana Republic" blog is reporting that Jack Dangelo has serious financial troubles in his recent past.

If the city approves the plan, it will not be for at least another month. The proposal calls for the building to be remodeled and leased for seven years to the Orange County Archives and Taller San Jose, according to reports. Taller San Jose is a nonprofit that provides "young adults, ages 18-28, the opportunity to finish their education and develop the skills to find a job with a living wage," according to its website. At the end of the lease the organizations would be able to buy the building.

Sam Romero is a dignified and direct man, and he had the mayor of Dana Point sympathetically nodding--slightly--tonight as he criticized the Dana Point city attorney for an offensive set of remarks and acts in Santa Ana on Feb 4.

The Dana Point city attorney, Patrick Muñoz , had appeared before a group of Logan business owners and residents "and described the houses in [historic] Logan as ‘crummy shacks that should be torn down,’" according to Gustavo Arellano in the OC Weekly on February 5. "To top that off," Arellano adds in his story on the incident, "Orange Juice blogger Thomas Gordon also claims Muñoz yelled ‘F**k you’ to him and gave Gordon the finger.”

"I am from one of those 'crummy little houses' in the neighborhood," Sam Romero began in his comments for the council.

Muñoz did not look at Romero as he spoke, but the rest of the council did. Romero quickly reminded them that Logan was built by Latino Californians who had nowhere else they were allowed to buy in the then racially segregated city of Santa Ana. He reported to the council that Logan is not a crime-ridden or run-down neighborhood, but instead is a low crime area that the community takes pride in. "It really hurts to have the neighborhood described that way," he said.

Romero gave a local history book to Mayor Joe Bishop, who thanked him.

Sean Mill, of the Liberal OC blog, has been raising awareness about Muñoz's actions. Mill actually spoke first. City council offered a sign of the stir Mill has successfully created when it felt the need to announce to the room quickly, just before Mill spoke, from prepared text, that there should be no personal attacks and that all comments must be addressed to the council. Though nobody on the council made any response to any of the speakers tonight, that warning was all the confirmation needed that the road trip was a success.

Though revealing, the council's anxiety was misplaced. Sean had come with a prepared text that was a professional and respectful credit to Santa Ana. But Sean spoke as a private citizen, not as a Santa Ana official. He reported what Muñoz said and did, as it can be found in the public press. He requested an apology from Muñoz and suggested that failure to do so should give the council pause as to whether they think he's fit for their service.

Thomas Gordon of the Orange Juice! blog also spoke, as did Pam Andrade. Both of them calling for an apology.

Actually a small contingent of "out-of-towners" showed up. Mill, Gordon, Joe and Pam Andrade, and Sam Romero as well as me, Albert Martinez, and Albert Castillo of Chican@s Unidos. The bunch of us exited in unison after our commentary was done. It was very dramatic. All the better since the local Dana Point paper had reported the impending showdown, and several people apparently recognized Mill and Gordon from their blogging.

Whose gonna be the first to hold their breath for that apology?

BTW, here's the flier left behind and handed to each council member and staff person:

Dana Point’s city attorney in the news:

1 – A. Patrick Muñoz on Santa Ana’s historic Logan neighborhood:

“Ware attorney A. Patrick Muñoz… rose before the group of 50 or so Logan-area businessmen and described the houses in [historic] Logan as ‘crummy shacks that should be torn down.’ To top that off, Orange Juice blogger Thomas Gordon also claims Muñoz yelled ‘F**k you’ to him and gave Gordon the finger.” (OC Weekly, February 5, 2008). Is that proper behavior for your city attorney?

2 – A dirty mouth for a company with a dirty past and present:

Ware Disposal, Muñoz’s client, has a controversial operations site in the Logan neighborhood. According to the Orange County Register, Santa Ana “city attorneys are investigating whether… Ware Disposal has violated the city code” governing garbage disposal in the neighborhood. (Register, Jan. 19, 2008). Ware has been cited before for a “checkered” record in recent years, with “significantly more citations” than four other regional companies (OC Register June 13, 2007).

Tell Muñoz and Ware to clean up their mouth and their act.

I Just received this from John Palacio, who sends education-related stories to constituents as a  service. Thanks John. In this account of a longitudinal  study that followed a study group from kindergarden through high school, we see evidence for schools that support and nurture kids  identified needs from very early in their education, as early as kindergarden. But I'll also add that we need high schools that don't crush what gets cultivated. We need dramatic educational reforms that are not about standards so much as about the needs of specific kids. Give them a reason to see themselves in school by inspiring them to see how school addresses their future. And I don't mean in a mechanical and two dimensional way--it's all about a job--but in a richer psychological and moral way.  Let them connect school with the texture of everyday life not only by bringing parents into school but reforming their daily tasks in school according to the needs and issues of their daily lives. -j

Just why do students drop out?

Quitting is gradual process that starts in K-8, team at ASU says in recent study

Editor's note: This article was submitted by Kelly Grysho, media- relations manager at ASU's West campus. Send your education news to lori.baker@arizonarepublic.com.

Thousands of Arizona high-school students drop out of school annually. Many of these children are too old to go to bed early and too young to drive, yet they abandon Arizona schools at the rate of about 28,400 each year.

Faced with the overwhelming task of finding a job in an increasingly complex and challenging society, why would a student leave high school before graduating?

A team of Arizona State University students believes it may have some answers.

The students are Rodel Community Scholars, an elite group of highly motivated undergraduates attending ASU's West campus and majoring in a variety of disciplines. They work alongside school administrators to identify and address key issues affecting Arizona's education system.

Led by ASU's Gregory Hickman, director of the Rodel Community Scholars program, the Rodel scholars recently completed a study titled "The Differential Developmental Trajectories of High School Dropouts and Graduates." The longitudinal study tracked students from kindergarten through high school, examining behavioral characteristics of dropouts.

The study will appear in the Journal of Education Research, a renowned periodical that reaches an international audience of educators concerned with cutting-edge theories and proposals.

"We've identified certain behaviors associated with high school dropouts," said scholar Mitchell Bartholomew, a 24-year-old resident of Glendale and an ASU psychology major. "We also discovered that the dropout process can begin as early as kindergarten."

This is contrary to earlier thought that dropping out was more of an impulsive act rather than a long-term process.

"As complicated as most circumstances are for these children, leaving school before graduation is not an instantaneous event," said Hickman, an associate professor in the College of Teacher Education and Leadership at the West campus. "It is a gradual process of that should be tracked long before a child progresses into high school."

Until recently, most dropout intervention programs typically target high-school students.

"This line of thought assumes children exist in an 'educational vacuum' from kindergarten through eighth grade," Hickman said. "Consequently, educators may be overlooking important developmental trajectories exhibited by students prior to entering high school."

As the former director of the Arizona Dropout Initiative, Hickman has conducted research into the factors affecting high-school attendance, including the impact of compulsory-attendance laws and the AIMS test.

"We discovered that as early as kindergarten, differences exist between graduates and dropouts; namely, dropouts miss more school than graduates," Hickman said. "Dropouts miss an average of 124 days by eighth grade. Educators should begin developing strategies to improve student attendance from as early as kindergarten."

Hickman adds that while certain behaviors are developed early, dropout characteristics are not necessarily set in stone.

"Kids can succeed despite their early history," he said. "You can't just look at a few demographic variables and write these kids off. There are too many windows of opportunity for change."

Reducing Arizona's dropout rates requires a profound rethinking of how to keep students in school. ASU's Rodel Community Scholars have developed innovative programs designed to make it easier for children to get from kindergarten to high-school graduation. Projects address everything from tracking struggling students to dropout intervention to increasing parental involvement to locating scholarships for high-school graduates.

"While we may never get the state's dropout rate to zero, we can definitely do better," Hickman said. "In today's world, if you don't have a high-school diploma, you're setting yourself up for failure."

Supporters of the effort to extend term limits for council members and commissioners in Santa Ana, an election initiative for the Feb 5  primaries listed on the ballot as "Measure D" and "Measure E," have struck a comical and clever low in political rhetoric.

In an automated call that Gustavo Arellano first reported upon at the Notes from the Banana Republic blog, supporters of the measures claim it "is critically important to ensure ethical and accountable leadership in City Hall." Listen to the entire call at Arellano's blog entry on the topic.

How does it ensure "ethical leadership"? It doesn't, unless you believe that all the other possible candidates are by definition less ethical than current council members. It promises a new code of ethics but tells us nothing about what the new code will say. How does it enhance accountability? It doesn't, unless you believe that continuing to re-elect the same council members makes them accountable.

The call is meant to co-opt the message of the opposition to measures "D" and "E." The opponents'  website claims rejecting the measures' extensions of term limits will help ensure the development of new leadership and more open government.

The call is deceptive and pernicious on its face. But Thomas Gordon over at The Orange Juice! blog managed to learn that the claim the call makes that Santa Ana teachers support Measure "D" is a fabrication. According to Gordon's post, the head of the Santa Ana teachers union, David Barton, says that the union and the teachers have not even discussed the measures, and certainly have not taken a position on them. Says Barton in an email to Gordon: "if someone calls you and implies that we have [endorsed it], they are misleading the public. "

So ask yourself, is such a campaign really indicative of an effort to promote ethical and accountable leadership? Is it? It depends upon what the meaning of the word "is"... is.

UPDATE:
The Orange Juice blog has posted a wickedly deceptive flier from the Yes on Measure D campaign. At the end there are a series of union endorsements. I wonder if the unions listed really support Measure D. I checked SEIU Local 721's website because the name "Santa Ana City Employee Union (SEIU 721)" sounded like an unlikely name for an SEIU local. It's acutal name, it turns out, is the "Southern California Public Employees Union." I find no evidence anywhere on their site that they have taken any position on Measure D. The chair of their Social and Economic Justice committee is Ron McMullen, 213-368-8660. I also suspected the "AFL-CIO Central Labor Council" name. It turns out the actual name is the "Orange County Central Labor Council." ( a regional branch of the national AFL-CIO). Their website also makes no mention of Measure D. Their number is 714-385-1534. I think calls to both organizations would be in order.