Statute? (I Don't Need to Give You Any Stinking Statute!)

Laurence Msall

Statute?  What Statute? (I don’t have to show you any stinking statute)

Lately, many of the corporatists in Chicago who wield influence and the monetary power to re-elect in Springfield have been pushing back against the addition of a “promise to pay statute” in several of the new pension reform bills presently floating in the General Assembly. 

SB 2404, now with nearly 20 sponsors, offers a statutory promise to pay pensions or resultant courtroom litigation.  In fact, SB2404 grants each retirement plan participant the power to bring a writ of mandamus against the State if any representative organization (TRS, for example) does not.  In other words, any specific person for any specific reason of being denied benefits may seek litigation.  Despite the many sponsors, the aforementioned pension reform bill is not a favorite of the corporatists: the Civic Federation, the Illinois Policy Institute, or the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago.  Their leaders – Lawrence Msall, John Tillman, Ty Fahner – find little to endorse in the one bill that signifies a collaborative effort between We Are One (the collective public sector unions) and the legislators. 

Senator Daniel Biss

Instead, the well-heeled executives of Chicago are backing a much more draconian bill that offers many cuts to benefits of public employees – both active and retired.  SB0035 would eliminate many of the benefits of current and retired teachers, but even those who crafted the bill (Senator Dan Biss & Rep. Elaine Nekritz) recognize some State culpability for the loss of many billions of dollars diverted/taken/stolen from the public employee pension funds by earlier state legislators for decades.  They are not alone.

Augmenting past fiscal impropriety, a recent action by the SEC accuses the State of Illinois as fraudulent in the selling of bonds while whitewashing the exact nature of the state’s extraordinary debt for non-payment to the pensions (and the state’s later weaseling out of payments back to the funds from those bond sales)(http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/12/business/sec-accuses-illinois-of-securities-fraud.html?_r=0 ).  

Ty Fahner of the Civic Committee

Think pension holidays.  Even the Tribune was compelled to publish a nearly accurate article, which made them consider even ex-governor Jim Edgar as culpable.  On the other hand, the Tribune carefully avoided looking any further back; otherwise, still living and in some cases paroled ex-governors would take center stage.  And this would force them to correct earlier sensational stories that Dixon’s comptroller Rita Crundwell was the biggest thief of municipal funds in Illinois history – and the Tribune hates to make corrections. 

Back to SB0035, a bill that would cap pensionable salaries, increase contributions to the highest in the nation, diminish cost of living increases, and increase retirement age.  Now, in its latest editorial, the Tribune follows the lead of Ty Fahner and other business leaders who decry the inclusion of such a statute in any bill, although they have unanimously decided that SB0035 is the optimal outline for pension reform (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-edit-vote-0318-jm-20130318,0,7659593.story ).  

Fahner, a long time good-friend and political partner to Governor Jim Thompson, has suggested that just having a solvent pension system is more than enough for those of us who have been given a contractual guarantee by the State of Illinois.  In other words, after they eviscerate our benefits and force us all to pay for the billons owed us, they (Fahner and the General Assembly) have no reason to provide any statutory promise to pay again.   

IPI's John Tillman

Even though its logic is lacking, the Tribune dresses Fahner’s sentiments in more serious and solemn pontification: “One Caveat on Biss’ bill: It includes unfortunate language that would put the state on the hook for regular payments into the pension funds as a contractual obligation. That’s a worthy commitment but also one stronger and more enforceable than what’s now in state law.  Which makes it a precarious requirement that we hope the House will eliminate.  Why so?”  The Tribune goes on to lecture that many things can happen between now and 2045.  They also suggest the state should – “not tie its own hands.”  

In other words, as Ty Fahner, John Tillman and Lawrence Msall would bluster, “Just getting a pension is your benefit, and keeping it solvent (for however long) is our temporal gift.  Take it or leave it.”  In actuality, the Tribune is endorsing the same set of loose interpretations, empty promises and partial payments that historically created the mess in which the State of Illinois now finds itself.  Some opinions are indeed better than others.

Speaker Madigan and Representative Nekritz

And why are the captains of industry and Zell’s pet paper project so frightened of this particular piece of the possible – bad-and-not-as-bad - bills before the legislature in Springfield?  Once, when Representative Nekritz was asked about a bill or law to force payment to the pension funds, she replied honestly and cynically, “We (the General Assembly) can undo any bill that we make after we make it.” 

Countering her unsettling comment, some of the equally honest and cynical representatives of veteran retirees have sarcastically reminded us all that the State has promised to make payments before, but we should trust them now because they promise in writing?  Wink, wink.  Nod, nod.

Others who strongly support SB2404 point to the statuary pomise as "ironclad" and "historic."

When asked about the actual permanence or enforceability of such a statute a few months ago at a Jobs for Justice meeting, Mr. Nigro from We Are One responded that any sudden or swift alteration in a promissory statute to pay to the Illinois pension funds would be unlikely as it would cause the blatant loss of credibility on the part of the General Assembly.  In other words, despite Nekritz's warning, once passed, it would likely remain; although the question of what kind of General Assembly would be seated in 2040 remained an issue.  Just as those who created the pension mess have departed the General Assembly (except for Madigan?), so too might the culture of the General Assembly change considerably in the next few years, and Mr. Nigro and several of the legislators in the room agreed that mutations could occur. 

On the other hand, the real answer may lie somewhere in the middle.  When asked, an Illinois contract lawyer and one Illinois Senator both agree that a law could be changed, but the precedence of its existence would remain. That is to say, according to the Senator, once installed as a member of the General Assembly, an individual (or body) could hardly refuse to follow the established legal commitments made as a body entire in the past.  In other words, he suggested, “I can hardly say that I or we will not pay those kinds of bills anymore since I was not here to make that original promise.  When we sign up to be part of something like the General Assembly, we take on those responsibilities – past and present and future.”  While it might be an arguable point, it would nevertheless present an interesting reference for any judicial review of an attempt to evade a due bill or responsibility.

Back to the extremists.  What the Tribune and their friends in Chicago business would have instead is business as usual.  What remnants of retirement security are left after their hopeful passage benefit destruction SB35 would be simply “enough.”  That is your pension, or what’s left of it.  There will not be a promise to pay for even that much – or that little. 

Thank you, sir.  May I have another?

Status of Bills SB0001 & SB0035

Brought to you by...

Status of Bills (SB0001 & SB0035)

Two bills crafted by Illinois politicians to place the pain of earlier misappropriations of public funds and fiscal irresponsibilities on the public servants of Illinois are moving quickly through the General Assembly this evening.  While both will face questions of a legal nature, we can all be assured that the General Assembly has no plans to look for revenue answers after half a decade of pilfering from public sector workers.  Augmenting that sad fact, the General Assembly has little if any respect for the very promises made in the 1970 Illinois Constitution -  that pensions are an enforceable contract that shall not be diminished or impaired.

Below you will find a political timeline of some importance as you prepare to make your phone calls, contact your neighbors, talk to your colleagues, and deal with your outrage. 

My major is subtraction...

SB 0035 is the pension “killer pill” that many of us have fought in its various mutations from SB 512 some two years ago.  It is the bill supported by the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago, Lawrence Msall, and John Tillman;  and it eviscerates the benefits of both active and retired public sector workers.  Basically, it calls for the end of pensions.  Its writers (besides Ty Fahner) include Sen. Daniel Biss, and Senators Van Pelt, Cunningham, and Steans.  Remember that in the House, Representative Elaine Nekritz promotes a similar bill.

SB0001 is the “choice” part of the tandem bill, one that provides for a coercion in the selection of the lesser pain/impairment of the contractual arrangement made by many, many actives and retirees - health care your family or staying in the middle class when you retire.  You can find the latest movement and description of these bills here:

http://ilga.gov/legislation/grplist.asp?num1=1&num2=100&DocTypeID=SB&GA=98&SessionId=85

And this guy lives in a public union neighborhood???

Important:  Note that these bills are headed to the floor tomorrow for second and third readings.  SB 0001 and SB 0035 are maturing like unbridled cancers.  Please read the outline below and call your legislator.

How a Bill Becomes Law

A Bill is drafted.

The Bill is introduced: it is read on three separate occasions to the legislative body and assigned a Bill number.

The Bill is referred to House and Senate Committee: the Rules Committee (three members from the majority and two from the minority refer the Bill to the appropriate committee for review).

There is a Committee Hearing where the Bill's sponsors explain the legislation to committee members. Lobbyists and concerned groups (the public) can declare support or opposition. If a majority of the committee votes in favor of the Bill, it is then considered before the entire chamber.

There is a Second Reading before the full legislative body; amendments are proposed at this step.

There is a Third Reading before the Chamber: the sponsor explains the Bill before the full chamber where questions can be asked. The Chamber votes on the Bill: (a majority is needed – 60 votes in the House and 30 in the Senate for the Bill – for the Bill to pass). If approved, the Bill moves to the other Chamber, and the Third Reading process is repeated.

If the Second Chamber approves the Bill, it is sent directly to the Governor. If the Bill is amended in the Second Chamber and then passed, it returns to the Chamber in which it originated so the members can agree with the changes. (In other words, if the Bill was amended in the Senate, it must return to the House for concurrence; if the Bill passes without being changed, the Bill is then sent to the Governor).

The Governor may sign the Bill into law, veto it (with recommendations for changes), or veto it (absolutely).

The New Bill becomes law if the Governor signs it. If the Bill is vetoed, it can still become law if both Chambers of the General Assembly vote by 2/3 majorities to override the Governor's veto.

Errand Boys - Rep. Morrison & Rep. Ives

Errand Boys (Representatives Morrison and Ives)

In the last dark scenes of Apocalypse Now (Scorsese’s disturbing tribute to Conrad’s Heart of Darkness), the character Kurtz chides the calculated, diminutive act of his would-be assassin by reminding him that he is no more than “an errand boy sent by grocery clerks to collect a bill.”  Kurtz mutually belittles the soldier and his ordering officers for their shameless self-advancement and intentional ignorance of the truth.   It would seem, in this case, that Illinois political life mirrors art.

The Illinois Policy Institute, a conservative think-tank with strong ties to ALEC (see earlier blogs) and offices in Chicago and Springfield, has sent two errand boys to do their bidding in the 2013 Illinois General Assembly.  The IPI’s design, as it has always been, is to free all business from government interference; in fact espousing, “when free market ideas are turned into law” all will be better for people (http://illinoispolicy.org/content/?section=456&t=About-Us).  The IPI also explains its mission as one of advancing education policies, but only of a certain kind as evidenced by their active membership in the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) Exchange.  Indeed, their current executive vice president Kristina Rasmussen has written and presented model ideas for pension reform for ALEC (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Illinois_Policy_Institute).  

Now, with HB 3303, we can see just how that pension reform would look if ALEC or the Illinois Policy Institute’s Tea Party errand boys could get some traction.  Actually, to understand how radical and far right these two sponsors are we might want to look at the bill.

HB3303 was introduced by Representative Tom Morrison (Palatine) in February and co-sponsored by Representative Jeanne Ives (Wheaton).  Don’t be fooled.  The bill was not written by Representative Morison or Ives – they’re mere errand boys.  The real clerks were Jon Tillman and Kristina Rasmussen at the IPI.  In fact, even Representative Ives’ site authenticates the true authors as the IPI.  Probably for many smart reasons, no one else has signed on. 

That does not deter the IPI from championing its own far-right bill.  John Tillman, the CEO of the Illinois Policy Institute, made several exclamations as to the worthiness of the HB3303 on WTTW’s Chicago Tonight during a recap of the Governor’s budget speech this March.  Although Ralph Martire, the director for the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability pointed out very likely unconstitutional issues with the proposed bill, Tillman overrode the former’s concerns with a loud “We’ll see,” and That’s debatable”

(http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2013/03/06/analysis-gov-quinns-budget-address).

The bill’s brief description is a “Pension Service Credit Freeze.”  Within HB3303, the bill “Provides that no additional service credit may be accrued and no automatic increase in a retirement annuity shall be received for all five state-funded services. Provides that the pensionable salary of an active participant may not exceed that individual's pensionable salary as of the effective date. Provides that State-funded retirement systems shall establish self-directed retirement plans for all active participants and all employees hired on or after the effective date. Provides that all active participants shall have the option of participating in a self-directed retirement plan. Provides that these changes are controlling over any other law. Effective immediately. “

Regardless of the pension protection clause in the Illinois Constitution, “diminish or impair” seem to be the very themes of HB3303, but that does not deter CEO Tillman.  He’s groomed Ives philosophically and monetarily as she ran for office, and she has been ever grateful for his economic support and the support he gives to many state Republicans (http://homerlockportillinoisteaparty.org/2012/05/29/message-to-ilgop-candidates-listen-to-what-people-say-but-watch-what-they-do/).

As a Tea Party candidate, she welcomes the opportunity to read IPI statements at gatherings: (http://ives.ilhousegop.org/2013/02/illinois-policy-institute-proposes-plan-to-fix-states-budget-pension-problems/).  For Ives, Illinois has a spending problem, not a revenue problem.  And pensions are a spending problem.  Ives announces in her Tribune editorial piece of March 8th, she would "circle that number (budget) with my red Sharpie and write, 'Check your math.'"  Ives goes on to boast that her and Morrison's plan would put $7 billion back in the people's pockets and reduce the unfunded pension liability by half.  By half?  Look again at HB3303, Rep. Ives, and "Check your constitution." After all, you swore an oath to uphold it. 

As for Representative Morrison, running a business that capitalizes on disaster cleanup, he has probably come to the perfect occupation as a legislator in Illinois. On the other hand, some analogies in interviews seem a bit simplified.  Comparing the pension issues in Illinois to the business design for disaster cleanup, Representative Morrison reports that you can’t fix a dry wall problem while water is “still gushing in – the building’ condition will worsen until the underlying issue gets resolved”

( http://www.csgmidwest.org/publications/documents/Morrison.pdf).

Of course, his IPI simplified plan to eliminate any increases in pension liabilities despite contractual promises might indicate whether or not Representative Morrison’s own business earns a positive rating from the customers or businesses he services.  What contract?

Meanwhile, Mr. Tillman and the Illinois Policy Institute enjoy a curious presence on WTTW, where the CEO holds court with pronouncements like “HB3303 is a good bill” despite even Carol Marin’s somewhat astonished silence.  And, of course, Tillman likes to promote his organization’s non-partisan, non-philosophical approach – it’s all just good business, my friend.  And you with a pension stand in his way.  Beyond the IPI’s site endorsement of the Civic Committee’s promotions, Mr. Tillman is promoting the “Pension Project” – an attempt to avoid paying what is (thank you, Helen Kinney and Henry Green) due to workers in Illinois.  His argument is that pensions are costing too much across the nation, not that Illinois has created an unfunded liability.  Representatives Morrison and Ives believe him.  Pensions are the problem, not the underfunding – freeze them all and get out of the business all together.  Besides, Tillman has other objectives to accomplish.  As soon as he completes this task, he wants to move on to California.  Find new errand boys. It’s all part of the ALEC strategic plan for the country

(http://illinoispolicy.org/news/article.asp?ArticleSource=5113).

Dissembling: Seven Simple Sentences

Dissembling (Seven Simple Sentences)

Dissemble – verb intransitive – to conceal one’s true feelings, beliefs or motives.

A recent electronic message from Representative Michael Tryon displays the kind of half-truths and factual recklessness that might even make the editorial staff of the Chicago Tribune blush.  On the other hand these kinds of false assertions have been so proselytized by opportunistic politicians and media, even Carol Marin on WTTW keeps a straight face while Representative Nekritz serves them up as reasons for HB 3411.

Here is part of Rep. Tryon’s plaintive email message.

“How Did We Get Here?

The pension liability is the single issue that places the most pressure on the budget. Simply put, the pension payment takes up so much of the available funds that there is not enough money left to pay for all the items in the rest of the budget. For many years, legislators made only partial pension system payments or skipped them altogether. During my eight years in the House I have never voted for anything less than a full pension payment. However, those poor decisions by the majority of lawmakers, combined with benefit perks that were not actuarially calculated to ensure future sustainability, and increasing life expectancies for pension recipients, has created a $97 billion pension liability that grows by a staggering $17 million every day. The second primary cause for the state’s financial problems relate to the shell games and fund “sweeps,” where money earmarked for one program has been moved around and used for other purposes. Over time, the result was expenditures that outpaced available resources (in some years by billions of dollars), a growing backlog of bills, and an accumulation of bonded debt.”

1. The pension liability is the single issue that places the most pressure on the budget.  As with many of our legislators, the Representative likes to blend the real problem of the unfunded liability (the money that was embezzled over the years from the pensions funds and now owed to the pensions) with the state’s normal costs for pensions.  In actuality, the amount to be paid to pensioners this year in TRS is actually less than last year, but he won’t and wouldn’t say that.  It would hurt his argument – and it’s the truth.

2. Simply put, the pension payment takes up so much of the available funds that there is not enough money left to pay for all the items in the rest of the budget.  Once again, Representative Tryon is performing the same kind of verbal legerdemain that so many in Springfield have become so masterful at doing.  It is true that the cost of the pension’s unfunded liability (remember all that money they owe that they embezzled to begin with?); but that is because the General Assembly has never had the fiscal intelligence and political foresight to dispense with a completely misguided re-payment schedule they themselves adopted in 1995 to back load their payments so that they became fiscally hamstrung by 2013. 

3. For many years, legislators made only partial pension system payments or skipped them altogether.  The Representative is almost correct, but “for many years” should actually read decades (maybe half a century?).  Indeed, the state has been taken to court regarding its refusal to pay, but alas, the courts have not been able to agree that an Article assuring pension as contractual promises necessarily means a need to pay.  And, thusly, legislators like Representative Tryon and others blithely went about the business of using the pension funds to pay for everything else – all the other services they now tell everyone are suffering because of pensions.  Once again, not really true.  But really short-sighted.

4. During my eight years in the House I have never voted for anything less than a full pension payment.  That’s nice to hear, but in actuality the State of Illinois chooses to use the least accurate actuarial methodology in determining the normal costs of pensions (not the unfunded debt), so the payment is based on present not future extrapolations.  They have a choice, but Representative Tryon and the others in the General Assembly choose the least expensive and least accurate – always have.  Are you surprised?

5. However, those poor decisions by the majority of lawmakers, combined with benefit perks that were not actuarially calculated to ensure future sustainability, and increasing life expectancies for pension recipients, has created a $97 billion pension liability that grows by a staggering $17 million every day.  This is the emotional tsunami sentence that Governor Quinn likes to use as much as possible.  I am sure we’ll hear it many times during the budget speech tomorrow.  In actuality, those “perks” like the COLA were part of a payment into contributions by TRS members in the 90’s, and the need to cover such an expenditure (according to Rep. Mike Fortner in an interview last year ) would require only a 1% additional contribution.  The We Are One coalition has already offered 2%, but in this state of hysteria and hyperbole to get it done quickly, Representative Tryon’s “the sky is falling” works so much better.  As for living too long?  We hear this argument from Republicans on the federal level too.  But this makes up for the egregious theft of billions of dollars to begin with.

6. The second primary cause for the state’s financial problems relate to the shell games and fund “sweeps,” where money earmarked for one program has been moved around and used for other purposes.  This is a classic piece of passivity in writing, where the actual subject disappears, so the guilty party can be veiled to assure the identification of another party (like public sector workers) to make it right.  What the sentence is actually stating is that “We, the government (your duly elected officials) not only stole the money from you for our own pet projects, but we also diverted pension obligation bond money and any other funds we could to our own uses.  Like Thompson used to crow to the public citizens, “we provided services without your having to pay anything more.”  Do you like me now?  Not really.

7. Over time, the result was expenditures that outpaced available resources (in some years by billions of dollars), a growing backlog of bills, and an accumulation of bonded debt.  Wow.  Talk about passivity.  Quite simply, this sentence states, “We took more money and bought more services without adequate revenue.  Because we thought we could pilfer eternally from these pension funds we not only spent extravagantly of their money, but we carried that fiscally capricious attitude over to other state programs, service costs and original pension obligations.  

That’s How We Got Here!

Pearson Corporation (Thanks, Arne): Reprise

Pearson Corporation (or Race to the Money) (BTW, thanks, Arne)  

Noun: Pearson Limited Company is a London-based publishing corporation, although it has a secondary listing on the NYSE due to its financial holdings and operations in North America.  There are several divisions of Pearson, ranging from financial publishing (Financial Times newspapers), Penguin publishing, and education publishing (primarily testing and test design).  Pearson is considered one of the largest book publishers in the world.  In fact, beyond its current operations and holdings, Pearson’s real business acumen in the burgeoning field of educational politics is displayed over and over again in its futuristic projects and plans based upon the movement in education from a public responsibility to a private for-profit enterprise.

As Naomi Klein warned us in Shock Doctrine, private enterprise looks for any opportunity in crisis or sudden change to establish an adaptable revenue source for profit, and nothing was ever so financially fertile as our “great national crisis” in education and the urgent need for political remedies.   

The introduction of Dubya’s NCLB (No Child Left Behind) and the furtherance of Obama’s RttT (Race to the Top) have provided multiple designs to remedy the “national crisis in public education” through the use of standardized testing – testing that measures a school’s effectiveness, a teachers’ effectiveness, and a student’s inabilities through a series of bubble tests which are being administered in increasing numbers of school districts for largely increasing amounts of time during each student’s academic year. 

In fact, in some cases, student testing this next year will double in order that some companies may “field test” the reliability of test questions placed among other questions that will count toward the student’s, teacher’s, and district’s performance ( http://www.parentvoicesny.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/10facts_HST.pdf ).  Of course, no one has suggested that such field-testing of minors without permission of parents might be considered an inappropriate use of instructional time or even illegal; in short, this speaks to the maddening acceptance of standards testing as a primary part of the educational program in our school systems.  Forget the comprehensive program or the variability in region or child: nowadays all good schools should be able to provide a similar sound and ready product measurably alike in specific skill sets determined necessary for the workplace.  And, in fact, there are four large corporations ready and willing to help us all in assessing who makes the grade and who doesn’t.

Harcourt Educational Measurement: London-based developer of the SAT-9, and designer of tests that require passing before graduation in several States.  Standards testing is now 70% of the company’s overall business ($5.6 billion annually in revenue).

CTB McGraw Hill: New York based corporation that developed TerraNova, a norm-referenced test.  Provides testing for 19 states in U.S. and achieves $4.2 billion in revenues per annum..

Riverside Publishing: Developer of the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, a norm-referenced test taken by 4-5 million students in the U.S.  Also a major publisher of texts for at least eight states in the U.S.  Parent company was Houghton-Mifflin, acquired by Vivendi, Inc.  in 2001 for $2.2 billion.

Pearson: The largest test scorer internationally, and providing testing and scoring services in the largest markets in the U.S., including New York, Texas, Florida.  At this time, moving beyond just testing to other aspects of education.   Revenue = $9 billion in 2010 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/cuomo-common-core-and-pearson_b_1293465.html ) 

Pearson remains most exceptional in its corporate ability and vision to move quickly and prominently to align itself with current political forces to achieve what it and they see as the future of education.  In addition, Pearson has even acquired the kinds of learning institutions that represent what it considers the future of learning, and the company has developed an international plan to do so on a global level.

Pearson now has designs to change the way and manner in which individuals achieve or receive GED’s, one which will become a profit-making enterprise for the company
(http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/28/opinion/collins-a-very-pricey-pineapple.html  ). In addition, Pearson has promoted heavily the concept of CCSS (Common Core State Standards) and provided a national summit for educators and politicians in Orlando, Florida, to cement the implementation of services in the coming year(s) (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/cuomo-common-core-and-pearson_b_1293465.html ).  In fact, Pearson’s exemplary initiative to influence would-be parties has come under the scrutiny of the New York Attorney General, who questions the relationship between the $32 million contract to provide testing for NY schools and the “free trips” provided across the state to educational officials to visit places like London, Helsinki, Singapore, or even Rio de Janeiro.  ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-singer/cuomo-common-core-and-pearson_b_1293465.html)  And let’s not forget the current lobbyist for Pearson in Washington is the same fellow who helped Congress and Dubya draft legislation for the original NCLB.  ( http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/28/opinion/collins-a-very-pricey-pineapple.html?_r=2&).  Estimates of lobby spending by Pearson on the state level reach nearly $3 million for 2009-2011 ( http://www.parentvoicesny.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/10facts_HST.pdf). 

On the other hand, if people are willing to pay to be “educated,” why not get into the business of education?  And that’s what Pearson has done wholeheartedly!  Seen any Phoenixes lately?  They appear in commercials every so often during afternoon talk shows with their ilk – lawyers for injury reparation, cheap car insurance, etc.  University of Phoenix is a recent acquisition by Pearson, a company who can see the future of education – a means to make money through on-line, instruction-less opportunity.  A close friend of mine who had the misfortune of teaching a Phoenix class once told me he had to spend nearly 80% of the time explaining why the school was so good in his carefully monitored lessons.

Finally, Pearson has a global plan too, my friends.  If America provides a wealth of money in the conversion to for-profit education, why not a developing country?  Pearson is currently designing for-profit chains of schools in Africa and Asia in order to establish a new market share.  In fact, Pearson plans to open a chain/franchise of schools in Ghana (Africa) called Omega Schools to fund low-cost education for profit.  (http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/marketplacek12/2012/07/international_publishing_giant_pearson_plc.html ) Unsuspecting and relatively poor governments in these countries see some escape from having to fund public schools (sounds like Rahm in Chicago?), and Pearson, whose caption “Learning-the-Pearson-Way” is so convincing will handle it all.  The plan is to offer lessons for the people’s children for as little as $3 per month.  Sounds good?  On the other hand, when one realizes that $3 per month for farmers and workers living at subsistence levels may be significantly more than they can afford –and certainly more than what was a free public education – the plan starts to lose some of its luster.  In addition, the poorer people would need to determine which of their children would receive the education at that significant expense, quite probably cutting off the possibility of learning for girls or others in their family.  But Pearson representatives say it will provide a wonderful, uniform education for all of the children in Ghana.  Well, maybe some of them.  But then again, sooner or later Ghana will need testing to see if they really are learning in the new Omega School system.  No need to wonder who will be there to provide help – at a cost.