For years, Jennifer Jordan has effectively been a flack for the teachers unions. When was the last time anyone can recall her writing an article that was (a) insightful; (b) evenhanded; or (c) even just plain informative?

Saying that the NEARI "disagrees" was editorial, not reporting. This is exactly what I sent to Ms. Jordan:

"The problem with proposing additional funding for charter schools during the current budget crisis is that it further diverts those dollars from state aid to education and the approximately 150,000 students in traditional public schools, and the further diversion of these funds hurts the existing schools and directly impacts property taxes.

Further funding for charters at this time also goes against two public policy imperatives. First, since charter schools are stand-alone entities, often with a higher percentage of costs allocated to administration, more charters mitigate against the policy interest of regionalization and consolidation of services. Second, despite an impetus towards performance measurements, the record of the existing charter schools is decidedly mixed. Perhaps existing charters that are not making the grade should be defunded and those resources should be allocated to new charters with a better chance of success. Another alternative is to follow the original idea behind charter schools - identify successful educational ideas and move those into the public schools so that all children can benefit from them. The idea that some children need additional time on task or more personal attention is not a new concept, and the funds should be made available to the traditional public schools so that all students can benefit from them."

Bob Walsh says "identify successful educational ideas and move those into the public schools so that all children can benefit from them".

Great. Let's do it.

One of the key "successful educational ideas" that the Charter Schools have employed is the absence of the anti-children Union and all the roadblocks to a good education that go along with the Union (e.g. tenure, lack of merit increases, inability to replace non- performing employees, etc.).

Bob, try as you might, you can NOT fool people into believing that you and your flock give a rat's ass about a quality education for "the children" over the special interests of your dues paying flock.

If you really cared about "the children" and the taxpayers, you'd demand educational choice and let parents vote with their feet.

Of course, that would mean that people would run as fast as they can from your underperforming flock. So, we don't expect you to support such a simple & fair approach anytime soon.

The good news is that in increasing numbers people across the country are recognizing that the teachers unions are a major, if not the major, part of the problem -- and will never be part of the solution.

Even some Democrats, who have traditionally been in the pocket of the teachers unions are starting to balk at the union label of expensive mediocrity that is public education in the United States.