|
Hofheinz general response:I strongly support equal educational opportunity for all persons, including early childhood preparation, public K through 12 schools, and higher education. My mother substitute taught, my father was a college professor, my former mother-in-law was a public school reading teacher for over 20 years, and I personally have taught both as a college adjunct and as a law school professor. I attended public schools through high school and for law school. Three of my children have attended public school.
I also firmly believe, however, that several principles govern the level of government appropriate to take needed and appropriate action. First, I believe in the local governance of public schools because it allows those most directly affected by decisions to make those decisions and allows local innovation and variations, which in the long run tend to optimize program results. Second, I believe that the governmental authority expending funds should impose the taxes that raise those funds. Third, I believe that when government expends funds it is responsible for directing with particularity the expenditure of those funds, to enhance accountability for decisions made. Fourth, I believe that state and local government are primarily charged with public education, for both historical and policy reasons, and that federal action is only appropriate when there is no or minimal association of place and problem addressed. Although it may from time to time seem expedient to violate these principles in the interest of perceived limitations in the non-federal political process, in the long run it is destructive to our political culture and the effectiveness with which we use government to act in the interest of all persons.
For these reasons, I support federal action with respect to early childhood development and higher education, while I oppose it for general primary and secondary education.
For an amplified discussion of these principles and others, please see my website at www.hofheinz2002.org.
The following responses are governed by the foregoing principles, which in the interest of brevity I simply include without repetition as "See Principles." where relevant to a particular response.
The following are NEA position statements on priority issues in the NEA Legislative
Program. For each issue, indicate whether you agree or disagree with NEA's position.
Please attach additional pages if you want to elaborate on your response. Be
sure each comment clearly indicates the position to which you are referring.
Agree with NEA's Position -- Would support legislation that reflects NEA's position.Disagree with NEA's Position -- Would oppose legislation that reflects NEA's position.
1. Well-trained teachers who have ongoing support, mentoring, and opportunities to update and enhance their skills are key to providing a quality public education. Therefore, NEA supports increased federal resources for programs to recruit, train, and retain the highest quality teaching force.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position, with the exception of retention. See Principles.
2. Talented, dedicated education support personnel are an integral part of any successful public school environment. Therefore, NEA supports providing federal assistance for appropriate training and ongoing professional development for education support personnel.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position. See Principles for guidance regarding my understanding of "appropriate training and ongoing professional development."
3. Federal education programs play a critical role in equalizing educational opportunity for all students, targeting resources to those areas with the greatest needs, and ensuring accountability for improving student achievement. Therefore, while NEA supports consolidating federal programs, NEA opposes consolidation that will eliminate or diminish accountability, remove targeting of funds to needy public school districts, or undermine the federal role in helping students with special needs.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position. See Principles for guidance regarding my understanding of "areas with the greatest needs." I oppose direct federal funding to any local school district outside the Principles articulated.
4. Public schools accept and educate all students who enter them. Diversion of public funds from public schools jeopardizes this mission. Therefore, NEA opposes draining funds from public schools through private or religious school vouchers.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position. Market-based decision systems are not appropriate for allocation of public funding. Such decisions are properly political decisions subject to public debate and policy.
5. Federal dollars are critical to ensuring the highest quality education for all students. Therefore, NEA opposes tuition tax credits, K-12 education savings accounts, or other direct or indirect tax subsidies that channel public funds to K-12 private, religious, or home schools.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position, but I oppose general federal funding of K-12 education. See Principles.
6. Students learn best in safe, modern, well-equipped facilities. Yet, 11 million students -- one in every four -- attend schools in crumbling, overcrowded, or unsafe condition. Therefore, NEA supports a federal role in helping state and local governments modernize, repair, and build public schools, including through tax credits for interest-free school construction bonds.
Hofheinz response:
I disagree with the NEA position since such matters are appropriate for state, not federal, action, while I fully support adequate resources for public schools and equality of opportunity for all students. See Principles.
7. The Individuals with Disabilities Act continues the federal government's historic and essential role as ensurer of equal educational opportunity. Yet, despite the federal government's pledge to pay 40 percent of the cost of educating students with disabilities, federal funding totals only about 15 percent of such cost. Therefore, NEA supports federal legislation to guarantee full funding of the federal portion of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and to protect special education from the unpredictable annual appropriations process.
Hofheinz response:
I disagree with the NEA position. Given a normal distribution of the population of students requiring such services, including both those with disabilities and those who are gifted, this is a problem for state action.
8. Charter schools can be positive vehicles for strengthening public education, but they must be held to high levels of educational and public accountability and must be prepared to welcome and educate all students. Therefore, NEA supports holding charter schools to the same standards, including teacher quality standards, as other public schools.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position.
9. Research confirms that children's learning begins well before they enter school. With the increasing emphasis on high standards, it is critical that the transition to K-12 school be founded on strong school readiness. Therefore, NEA supports strengthening federal early childhood programs, including ensuring full access to Head Start for all eligible children and expanding the Child Care and Development Block Grant, Title I preschool services, and the Early Learning Fund.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position in part and disagree in part. I strongly support Head Start and would act to support access for all eligible children. I oppose block grants without imposed federal mandatory program standards and conditions, thus do not support the other programs referenced since application of funds is based on ad hoc project grants based on local decision making. See Principles.
10. Discipline, order, and safety have a direct link to student achievement. Therefore, NEA supports increased support and resources for safe and drug-free school programs, additional school counselors and mental health services, anonymous tiplines, and violence prevention programs.
Hofheinz response:
I disagree with the NEA position since such matters are appropriate for state, not federal, action, while I fully support adequate resources for public schools and equality of opportunity for all students. See Principles.
11. Efforts to ensure school safety cannot succeed absent measures to block youth access to guns. Sensible gun safety laws are an essential piece to a comprehensive approach to school safety. Therefore, NEA supports federal legislation that mandates background checks for purchasers at gun shows; requires child safety locks on all new guns sold; prohibits the transfer to and possession of semi-automatic assault rifles and large capacity magazines by juveniles; and holds adults responsible if a child gains access to a loaded firearm that has not been properly stored and is used in the commission of a crime.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position with respect to background checks and transfer to and possession of semi-automatic weapons by juveniles. I have no opinion of the question of safety locks. I believe adult responsibility is a state question.
12. Ensuring every child the opportunity to excel requires addressing the issues faced by low-performing schools. More resources and training; increased instructional time; clear alignment of standards, curriculum, and performance indicators; and parental involvement are critical to turning low-performing schools into quality schools. Therefore, NEA supports targeting increased federal resources directly to low-performing schools.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the statement of principle posed by this question; I disagree with the NEA position since such matters are appropriate for state, not federal, action, while I fully support adequate resources for public schools and equality of opportunity for all students. See Principles.
13. Federal funding through Title I makes a critical difference in raising achievement at low-performing schools, by helping provide instruction, hire additional teachers and teaching assistants, purchase classroom materials and computers, and support other instructional services and resources. Yet, at current funding levels, Title I fully serves only one-third of eligible students. Therefore, NEA supports increased federal resources to move toward fully serving all eligible students.
Hofheinz response:
I disagree with the NEA position since such matters are appropriate for state, not federal, action, while I fully support adequate resources for public schools and equality of opportunity for all students. See Principles.
14. Rigorous assessment of student achievement at the state and local levels is essential to raise student achievement. High-stakes decisions about students and schools, however, should not be made on the basis of one test. Therefore, NEA supports a comprehensive system of assessment and accountability that relies on multiple measures of evaluation and prohibits the use of a sole test for high-stakes decisions.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position.
15. Students competing for jobs in the global economy of the 21st century will need greater access to higher education opportunities. Therefore, NEA supports federal assistance to increase access to higher education for all students, including increasing the number of students participating the Pell Grant program, raising the maximum Pell Grant award, and enhancing programs such as GEAR-UP and TRIO that help lower-income students transition to higher education.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position, but would go further. Every person should have available through federal funding (not loans) all higher education for which he or she is qualified and can perform at acceptable standards. I support TRIO and also GEAR-UP, to the extent which it is consistent with the Principles.
16. Smaller classes allow for more individualized attention and instruction, earlier identification of students with learning disabilities, and improved classroom discipline. Therefore, NEA supports expanding federal assistance to local public education agencies to reduce class size to an average of 18 students in kindergarten through third grade, and to reduce class size substantially in later grades.
Hofheinz response:
I disagree with the NEA position since such matters are appropriate for state, not federal, action, while I fully support adequate resources for public schools and equality of opportunity for all students.
17. Educational technology offers students expanded academic opportunities as well as critical employment skills necessary for entering the workforce of the global economy. Therefore, NEA supports federal programs to help schools purchase computers and software, modernize classrooms to support education technology, and train teachers and other school personnel in the use and effective integration of new technology into the curriculum.
Hofheinz response:
I disagree with the NEA position since such matters are appropriate for state, not federal, action, while I fully support adequate resources for public schools and equality of opportunity for all students. See Principles.
18. Protection of equal rights and opportunities for all is a cornerstone of our nation's democracy. Therefore, NEA supports federal legislation to maintain and protect the civil rights of all individuals, including children and education employees.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position.
19. Federal education dollars should never be used to support discrimination or to undermine civil rights. Therefore, NEA opposes diversion of federal funds to any organization, including faith-based organizations, that discriminates in its hiring or in the provision of educational services to participants.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position.
20. Protections provided to public employees through collective bargaining or state legislation are state matters that should be kept free from federal intrusion. NEA opposes any federal action that diminishes the rights, benefits, or protections granted to public employees through collective bargaining or legislation, such as the right to fair hearing prior to dismissal.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position. I support strong protection of the right to collective bargaining at the federal level as well, however, without preemption of more protective state action.
21. Proposals to allow use of federal funds for merit pay, "tenure reform," or the testing of teachers offer ineffective, inefficient, and unfair means of addressing teacher quality. NEA opposes diverting federal funding to merit pay, tenure reform, or testing of current teachers.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position, but on the basis that such matters are not appropriate for federal action, not the stated reasons.
22. Requiring mandatory Social Security or Medicare coverage for all public employees would weaken state and local plans whose benefits are often superior to those provided by Social Security, while doing little to solve Social Security's larger, systemic financial problems. There, NEA opposes mandatory Social Security or Medicare coverage for those employees of state and local governments that have elected to remain outside the federal Social Security/Medicare system.
Hofheinz response:
I disagree with the NEA position. All workers should be covered by Social Security and Medicare, whether public or private; such coverage should not be viewed as a replacement for retirement benefits resulting from employment, but as our collective expression that we as a people will provide for those without other resources. For a more extensive statement about the role, funding, and assurances of Social Security, please see my website at www.hofheinz2002.org.
23. The Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision discriminate [sic] against individuals who have chosen to serve their communities or country in public jobs. Currently, retired public employees have the Social Security or survivor benefits reduced. Non-public employees with private pension, however, can receive both their pension and their full Social Security benefits. Therefore, NEA supports federal legislation to eliminate the Government Pension Offset and Windfall Elimination Provision.
Hofheinz response:
I disagree with the NEA position. Referenced public employees are only affected if they did not pay Social Security taxes while qualifying for their public pension benefits; non-public employees must pay Social Security taxes in addition to direct or indirect contributions to private pension plans. Thus this provision prevents an unfair relationship between qualification and contribution. As noted above, however, I believe all workers should be covered by Social Security and Medicare, whether public or private. Such a change would make this provision moot.
24. Union members rely on their national representatives to provide up-to-date information about political and legislative developments that directly impact them. Therefore, NEA supports the right of unions to use membership dues to communicate with the members about political issues of interest and concern to them.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position. I support strong protection of the right of workers to act collectively.
25. Small-donor Political Action Committees (PACs) provide education employees a means by which to participate in the political process. Therefore, NEA supports an increase in the limits that small donor PACs can contribute to political parties and candidates comparable to any increase in limits that may be enacted for individual hard money contributions.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position.
26. Restrictions on the use of voluntary union dues money for legislative and advocacy activities undermine the ability of voluntary member organizations such as NEA to advocate on behalf of children and public education and represent an unprecedented governmental intrusion into internal union operations. Therefore, NEA supports the right of unions to use voluntary dues money for constitutionally protected lobbying and advocacy activities.
Hofheinz response:
I agree with the NEA position. I support strong protection of the right of workers to act collectively. I do not agree that such restrictions "represent an unprecedented governmental intrusion into internal union operations."
Walter Wm. Hofheinz
2401 Turtle Creek Blvd.,
Dallas, Texas 75219
214.363.2400
walter@hofheinz2002.org