In its editorial of Oct. 22, 2014, “Initiative is not the path to better schools”, the Everett Herald errors on the issues surrounding I-1351. They do so either from a lack of knowledge or with deliberate intent. Neither is very attractive in a news source.
The Herald makes four errors.
The Herald lies by omission, creates a red herring to distract us, creates a straw man argument (and then contradicts itself), and misrepresents the nature of a modern day player in this discussion.
Find out what's happening in Kirklandfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
“provides no funding for additional classroom space”
Opponents who mention this issue, without mentioning that the initiative contains language for alternative applications of the funding in situations where inadequate classroom space is an issue, are lying by omission. The Herald makes their lie even more egregious by repeating it in the next sentence.
Find out what's happening in Kirklandfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
“provides no funding source, leaving that decision to the Legislature”
Whether I-1351 lacks funding or specifies funding, opponents would attack the funding issue in order to avoid having to openly oppose helping kids to have more productive learning environments. Such arguments are called “red herrings”. In this case, at least the legislature has the authority to create the funding. When the legislature orders schools to do something and leaves out the funding, it pushes the burden of funding onto a jurisdiction that lacks the authority to create that much funding.
“leaving that decision to the Legislature, which at the same time must find funding to satisfy the state Supreme Court’s McCleary ruling”
Treating I-1351 and McCleary as if they were separate issues is both false and a common tactic to create a straw man argument. What is accomplished by I-1351 can be credited to the obligation imposed by McCleary. The Herald then contradicts that argument by acknowledging that, “I-1351 actually helps the state meet its goal of fully funding education, …”
“Opponents, including the League of Education Voters, which wrote the first class-size initiative, I-728, in 2000…”
Today’s League of Education Voters (LEV) is in no way comparable to the LEV of 2000. That fact is made clear when we acknowledge that the CEO of LEV is also the Chairperson of the Board of the Washington State Charter Schools Association. The focus of today’s LEV is to support the cause of charter schools, not traditional public schools.
I respectfully submit that, if this is representative of the information upon which citizens are drawing their conclusions about I-1351, they are going to be sadly misinformed.