BCT Editorial – 3/24/05

This page was last updated on March 24, 2005.

Class shows; Editorial; Beaver County Times; March 24, 2005.

Predictably, the Times is onboard with the class warfare accusations of a Democrat legislator. Not once in the editorial will you find the author(s) argue the merits of consolidation or the goals.

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“A proposal to create countywide school systems in Pennsylvania is dead on arrival in Harrisburg because too many people have too much invested in the status quo.”

[RWC] The editorial fails to note Mr. Lescovitz also made this proposal two years ago. It’s nothing new.

“And not in the way you might think - sports, tradition, etc. No, school districts are a place where class shows.

“Think about what would happen to the value of homes if the proposal by state Rep. Victor Lescovitz, D-46, Midway, to create 67 school districts became law. Suddenly, the value of homes would not be linked to the quality (perceived or real) of the local school district.

“People who have invested heavily in homes in well-to-do school districts won’t like the idea of de-linking their property from their local school district because it would put the value of what is many people’s biggest investment at risk.”

[RWC] Opposition couldn’t have anything to do with a continued erosion of local control over education, could it? No, it must be greed by the very people who not only pay for their own school districts, but who also subsidize the “poorer” districts.

“Meanwhile, going to a countywide system would be a boon to school districts based in older communities and rural areas. But these districts are largely small and poor, which means they have little or no clout.”

[RWC] Note that the editorial fails to explain why it believes “a countywide system would be a boon to school districts based in older communities and rural areas.”

“Lescovitz acknowledges that wealthier school districts might not like his idea because they ‘like the system the way it is.’

“‘They like the separation of the classes,’ he said. ‘I’m not sure they want everybody on a level playing field.’”

[RWC] Mr. Lescovitz must have attended the “Tom Murphy (Pittsburgh mayor) School of Demagoguery.” You’ll remember Mr. Murphy blamed “racism in the predominantly white suburbs as a major impediment” to merging the city and Allegheny County. When the facts don’t support your position, some people attempt to set one group against another. The editorial author is equally guilty because he reports Mr. Lescovitz’s comment as fact. You’ll remember the Times also tries to frame the mass transit mess as an “urban vs. rural” war. Socialists sure like the class warfare tactic.

“There are other reasons why Lescovitz’s proposal won’t fly - for instance, the funding formula has little connection to reality - but class cannot be discounted. Pennsylvania is well on its way to having two public schools systems, one rich and one poor, in large part because of the funding inequity that exists among the commonwealth’s 501 school districts. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer and the districts in the middle are getting squeezed out.”

[RWC] What a crock of @#$%^&*!

I hate to use this language, but I believe the author of this and all other Times editorials on this subject is deliberately lying to readers or is woefully ignorant of the facts. Time after time I’ve shown the “rich” school districts actually subsidize the “poor” districts. In many cases, the subsidy is so great some “poor” districts actually spend more per student than some “rich” districts. Locally, the Center Area (“rich”) and Aliquippa (“poor”) districts are an example. The Times knows this yet chooses to perpetuate the lie of “funding inequity.”

“All it takes is for the power brokers in Harrisburg to do nothing for the status quo to be maintained. And if there is one thing they are good at, it is doing nothing that will threaten their status quo.”

[RWC] As I noted above, not once did the editorial mention the alleged goals of school district consolidation or discuss the merits. All the editorial did was bash people who didn’t accept the “bigger is better” approach to education.

Since the editorial didn’t want readers to know Mr. Lescovitz’s logic, I’ll quote a so-called “guest editorial” by Mr. Lescovitz. The legislator wrote, “This is a change I strongly believe is necessary to create a more uniform and testable curriculum.” In summary, the primary reason Mr. Lescovitz cites is to make student testing easier! Do we really pay legislators for this level of [non] thought?

1. Murphy says racism in suburbs bars merger; Jeffrey Cohan; Pittsburgh Post-Gazette; December 4, 2003.