(Note: Michael Ackley’s columns may contain satire and parody based on current events, and thus mix fact with fiction. He assumes informed readers will be able to tell which is which.)
Last week this column complained about First 5 California commercials touting preschool attendance as a virtual guarantee of a child’s social, academic, psychological, artistic and economic success.
State tobacco tax funds are financing this social engineering, which I took to be the outcome of bureaucratic brainstorming on how to expend the sin-tax revenue.
I appear to have been na?ve. (Who said “again”?)
Arriving next, as if on cue, was actor/director Rob Reiner, accompanied by a California Teachers Association dog-and-pony show pushing a ballot initiative that would tax businesses to finance “Preschool for All!” – and smaller class sizes, of course.
Far from hurting business, Reiner explained, this ultimately would improve the workforce and boost the economy. (Smarter, better-adjusted and therefore more productive employees, don’t you see?)
The tax would raise about $1.5 billion to finance preschool for every child who wants it.
Seeking further exposition, we contacted the Reiner entourage and were referred to a CTA spokesman, Howard Bashford.
“Can you explain the curious coincidence of the initiative announcement and the First 5 ads,” we asked.
Bashford was instantly huffy.
“I don’t think it’s curious at all,” he said. “The people in state government want what’s best for the children; we want what’s best for the children. It’s not surprising two groups of sensitive people came up with the same solution.”
“Well, how about this assertion that the money raised would pay for preschool for every child who wants it?” I asked. “Wouldn’t this leave $1.5 billion in the bank, because if you ask the kids, none of them will want it?”
“Don’t want it?” he exclaimed incredulously. “Of course they want it. They’re just too young to know it.”
He paused, collected himself and continued in a conciliatory tone, “You have to understand, what we’re really saying is every kid needs preschool. If the children need it, how can parents deny it?”
There was a glint in his eye as he continued, “As a matter of fact, they shouldn’t be allowed to deny it. It should be required, but, like other elements of the plan, we can’t shoot for that from the start.”
“What else can’t you shoot for from the start?” I asked.
“We can’t demand immediately that preschool instructors be certificated teachers,” the CTA spokesman said. “That will come later, after testing data show uncertificated preschool operators are incompetent. Then the real recovery – indeed, a boom – will begin.”
Confused, I asked, “for the economy?”
Bashford smiled condescendingly.
“For the teachers’ union,” he said.
File under “window dressing”: Having followed the Jayson Blair affair closely, I naturally was attracted by the headline announcing the New York Times had hired an ombudsman to keep an eye on its ethics. There followed a story about the lucky man, his impeccable credentials and the free rein he would have.
We predict this: The impeccable ombudsman soon will begin filing columns explaining that reporter Bashford Honeybutter should have made more follow-up telephone calls, or that copy editor Sullivan Brunch should have used more temperate wording in his headlines. Sins of negligence and omission will constitute the bulk of his analyses.
We all should be more than surprised – we should be astounded – if the new Mr. O ever concludes that a reporter or editor deliberately slanted the news to conform to his political or social views. But that’s really the problem.
Worth retelling: Arnold Schwarzenegger is getting so much press worldwide, you probably all know the governor-elect is house hunting in California’s capital. If you’re wondering why he doesn’t just move into the governor’s house, the answer is there isn’t any such thing, despite several media references to his “moving into the governor’s mansion.”
(You can’t count the Victorian governor’s mansion in downtown Sacramento. It has been operated as a historic park for decades.)
Republican Gov. Ronald Reagan is the one who signed legislation to have a new mansion built. Funds were allocated and a huge home was completed in the Sacramento suburb of Carmichael, just in time for Democrat Gov. Jerry Brown to spurn it. He preferred more austere quarters downtown, so the place sat during his term.
When Republican George Deukmejian unexpectedly whipped Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley in the 1982 gubernatorial election, the bitter Democrats who controlled state government sold the mansion rather than see a Republican be the first to occupy it. They said they did it for economic reasons – naturally.
The “new” mansion – behind secure walls and gates, on beautiful grounds that slope down to the American River, with rooms and security designed for state functions – is for sale again, for many millions of dollars less than the $10 million figure being bandied about as the price of another governor’s residence.
Since the Democrats sold it “to save money” back in ’82, what are the odds they’ll save money now, by doing the logical thing and buying it back?
