Press "Enter" to skip to content

District 19 House Candidates Unanimous: HB 1234 Stinks!

Last updated on 2014.07.14

When we get Governor Daugaard's education plan on the ballot, it's sure to get beat in at least one Legislative district. Following up on a Mitchell Daily Republic report last week, Randy Dockendorf at the Yankton Press & Dakotan finds that all four Republicans running for District 19 House oppose House Bill 1234. I already covered Rep. Stace Nelson, Sen. Jim Putnam, and Roger Hofer's rejection of the Governor's dysfunctional, ideological education agenda. Let's add new Republican Kyle Schoenfish's blessedly evidence-based assessment of HB 1234:

Schoenfish, who ran unsuccessfully as a Democrat for the House in 2010, said he opposes HB 1234 for a number of reasons.

"This contains a one-size-fits-all mentality, which isn't the way to go," he said. "Merit pay hasn't been shown to raise student achievement. We need to bring up the pay for all teachers before we go to merit pay" [Randy Dockendorf, "District 19 GOP Race Focuses on Education," Yankton Press & Dakotan, 2012.06.01].

Bonus Blast: Schoenfish also says we're putting too much emphasis on standardized testing, at the expense of local school district control. It's no wonder Governor Daugaard didn't include District 19 on his list of primary endrosements: he can't find any Republicans there backing his agenda!

Four District 19 Republicans agree with me (whoa! read that line again!) that HB 1234 is a lump of coal in our K-12 stocking, not a gift. The one Democrat contending for a District 19 House seat, Alan Fenner, also sqaurely opposes HB 1234. That guarantees that, whoever represents District 19 in the 2013 session, they won't be voting to support funding for the Governor's destructive K-12 education agenda. Yahoo!

26 Comments

  1. Owen Reitzel 2012.06.01

    as a part of District 19 I'm anxious to meet Mr. Fenner and hear his views. I'm glad he's against HB1234.
    If people want change in Pierre we need more Democrats in office. We can't let people fall for the garbage from the far right wing saying that a moderate Republican is a Democrat.

  2. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.01

    No doubt, Owen! We need to keep hold of our brand. As Democrats, I think we get more say on who's a Democrat and who's not than folks like Gordon Howie and Lora Hubbel.

  3. Barry Smith 2012.06.01

    Cory do you mean this Lora Hubbel? The one who is against insurance because it is Socialist.

  4. Supersweet 2012.06.01

    Allan Fenner is a good man. We use to farm together back in the '60's. He knows how to plow a straoght furrow.

  5. Stace Nelson 2012.06.02

    A moderate Republican is NOT a Democrat, neither is a Democrat that changes partys to run as a Republican just to get elected. What they are is political opportunists that help pass such fine bills as HB 1234, HB 1133, etc.

    What we need in Pierre is more people willing to work for the people that elect them than the special interests that fund their campaigns, or future commission, judicial appointments, etc.

    Mr "H," I am surprised you have not highlighted some of the finest legislators money can buy yet?

  6. Charlie Hoffman 2012.06.02

    I don't have much time left this morning to banter back here but one thing needs a bit of clarification. The will of the legislators to do for their constituents must always include the whole of the district including all the people. For any man or woman to attempt to pervert the process by adhering to their own personal interpetation of the SD Constitution and the US Consititution by way of a very fixed and narrow view on what they feel all the people should be getting from them is in my mind wholeheartedly corrupting the legislative process. Of course when the Democrats are in power we should see a shift towards democratic ideals and vice-a-versa when the Republicans gain power. That shift should be neither bold nor abrupt nor painfull for the general public as legislative agenda's should if run as the original framers of our constitution planned. That being very slow and obviously tedious in nature. The obvious beauty of HB 1133 is that it totally conforms to all the needed constitutional guarantees in our SD Constitution that the three areas of state government be equal in power and checkered in power sharing of legislative intent and purpose by allowing the legislative course of action to slowly evolve with leaders of the legislature putting research into proposed legislation during the entire year and not just for 40 days of the atual legislative sesson. Unfortunately there are those who because of their incessant nature of needing to purge every piece of legislation which does not conform to their personal ideologically driven purity rating of their assumed role in defining what a party platform is will do anything to negate that bills (HB 1133) true purpose. When the minority can control what the majority wants and votes for it is called something other then what we call our form of government. To date the most important and valued bill I have had the opportunity to vote for which will enhance the strength and scope of our legislature is HB 1133. The ideas which come from that committee will be discussed, hashed over, bled to dry, and then voted on by the whole legislature. And then if the Governor does not find those pieces of legislation fitting for South Dakota he may veto them. As he should for that is his job.

  7. Owen Reitzel 2012.06.02

    "A moderate Republican is NOT a Democrat, neither is a Democrat that changes partys to run as a Republican just to get elected. What they are is political opportunists that help pass such fine bills as HB 1234, HB 1133, etc.

    What we need in Pierre is more people willing to work for the people that elect them than the special interests that fund their campaigns, or future commission, judicial appointments, etc."

    I agree Stace, some of these people switched parties just to get elected. But there are some who switched to sincerely become Republicans.

    The problem I have Stace is that the far right of your party can't seem to compromise for the good of the people. Believe it or not Democrats can have good ideas as well. But the far right believe that their way is the ONLY way.
    In Indiana Richard Lugar lost to a far right-wing person who when asked if he would compromise with Democats said "As long as they agree with me." Is this good government? I don't think so.

  8. larry kurtz 2012.06.02

    "Somewhere along the line, some of the dumbest creeps you ever knew in high school have taken control of the Republican party." RT @Shoq

  9. Stace Nelson 2012.06.02

    @Charlie HB 1133 is an abomination that seeks to subvert the electoral process of the people by allowing term limited legislators to continue affecting legislative matters of the people WELL after they are supposed to be gone, you can throw lipstick on it and bathe it in Channel #5 but it is still an ugly pig. Appointtees to that committee will be receiving some of the scant administrative/monetary resources that elected legislators are already hard pressed to obtain in sufficient amount to represent the districts they were elected to. We already have way too many that ignore the will of the voters on 8 year term limits by bouncing back and forth in the different chambers, some 24-26 years now.

    @Owen I don't have time to respond to your assumptions and misguided statements; however, I will again ask you, how you enjoying that great comporimise the "moderate" "Republicans" made on HB 1234? Guess I should have gotten in on all the deal making and compromising? Keep thinking it is the conservatives that are the problem as the moderates compromise you down the river.

  10. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.02

    Stace, HB 1234 is not an example of "compromise" with the other party. Not one Democrat voted for it. Team Daugaard had its plan and was determined to ram it through. The "compromise" was mostly a reshuffling and clever section-renumbering of Daugaard's language, 90% of which is still in the bill. In reminding us of the value of compromise, Owen shows us the route that might have made HB 1234 a workable, tolerable policy instead of an exercise in executive arm-twisting.

  11. Charlie Hoffman 2012.06.02

    Stace I have been patiently waiting for a reply though I never singled you out in my diatribe. Should we pick and choose who gets to testify in committee? (That might allow for throwing out any who do not believe in your respective beliefs of the US Constitution and any old legislators who you battled against!) How much funding do you receive from LRC for summer travel and time to and from your constituents? I have never received a penny and am wondering where you have had complaints from your district in your none attendance at public events. WE just go to them when warranted in District 23. I have never complained about not being compensated for attending meetings of importance and do not understand where you are coming from. In regard to term limits do you not understand the law? Eight years in any house is what the law states. If you have a different proposition then change the law; but please do not obstruct justice by implying that those who follow the letter of the law are breaking it just because the law is not exactly what you would wish to see. Shheesse; where does it end?

    Cory, show me one part of HB 1234 which hurts or constrains the mental aptitude of students in any public school which follows the intent of the bill? You cannot!! It is the teachers whom do not want any competition between them which is the crux of the problem for you and others who are now publicly terrorizing anyone who supported it. Honestly now; 15 Million more dollars spent on teacher salaries and you revolt because it was not your or SDEA's idea~~~! OK , we agree to disagree then!! What do you propose to increase the mental aptitude of our K-12 students?

  12. Owen Reitzel 2012.06.02

    Sigh. Again Stace I thank you for your vote against HB1234 but as Cory said that bill wan't a compromise. That was rammed through by Republicans.
    Here is what I mean. You and me are elected to the House. I'm left of center and your to the right. A bill comes up that you want passed but you don't have enough votes to pass it. You know you need me so get at least some of it passed. So we sit down and get an agreement by you giving up something and then I give something up that I want. We end up with a bill that's not perfect for either one of us but is workable and the people come out ahead. That's the way it used to be. Now, your pals on the right don't want to comprise at all. And there's the problem. In Washington it's worse. Look at Noem and Thune. They've never heard of the word.

    Charlie $15 million more for salaries? that's a crock. Alot of very good teachers won't see a dime of that. Shouldn't teachers work together to improve student learning and not compete for it. Now if my wife comes up with a good idea that can be applied to other grades she'll pass it on to other teachers. Under HB1234 what incententive does she have to share?
    HB1234 is a bad bill-period

  13. Sam Peil 2012.06.02

    Charlie,

    How does HB1234 increase the mental aptitude of students?

  14. Stace Nelson 2012.06.02

    @Charlie Voters' intent was 8 years, not 8 years here, then 8 years there, then 8 years back again. South Dakotans are best served when those incestious relationships are not allowed to fester but when new butts fill those seats with legislators who vote solely on the damn merits of the bills not petty high school antics that was witnessed these last two years. that HB 1133 SUBVERTS the legitimate legislative branch of the people by putting APPOINTEES as a buffer between the people and their legislation. If our Founding Fathers wanted super committees of appointees, that is what they would have established. They didn't because the legislative branch is supposed to be the voice of the people with power spread across that representation to avoid the highjacking of the representation of the people and to act as a checks and balance against the executive & judiciary. This politburo crap is an assault on the very representative form of government the citizens of South Dakota are entitled to.

    @Owen You extoll the virtues of the moderate & liberals in the Republican party and then cut that support short when it is shown they are the problem as in HB 1234. I can only answer to that which I am responsible, and to that end I have reached across the aisle on numerous occasions and responded in-kind when it was something that I could support. I am proud of the working relationship and friendship that I have with some of the Democrat legislators. I also have huge respect for the fact that when House "Leadership" tried to shop around the idea of throwing me out of the legislature citing concocted claims, the Democrats would have nothing to do with it and called me with a message of support.

  15. Stace Nelson 2012.06.02

    P.S. @Owen & Cory AU CONTRAIRE Mon Ami! There was plenty compromising on HB 1234; however, it was all principle based and not many of the deals evolved thereof will you get many to admit to.

  16. Jana 2012.06.03

    Charlie, I had no idea that you cared so deeply for the mental aptitude of students. The draconian cuts inflicted by your fellow Republicans during the 2011 session threw me off.

  17. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.03

    But Stace, none of that compromise was with Democrats. None of that compromise was with SDEA or teachers in general.

    But let's not lose sight of our agreement on both HB 1234 and the question of compromise. I do not embrace compromise as a goal in itself. I agree that some legislative proposals are so bad that there should be no compromise. Merit pay for teachers, for example, is such a bad idea that I would demand it be removed entirely from the bill.

  18. Stace Nelson 2012.06.03

    Mr "H," Whaaat? Merit pay bad? You mean the subjective human element of picking favorites won't encourage people to perform better when their accomplishments are ignored over someone simply kissing up to a supervisor? Why it works soooo well in the federal government where they have spent large fortune after large fortune "perfecting" it to a science! Sorry, a little Sunday morning humor.

  19. Carter 2012.06.03

    When it comes down to it, I personally think the concept of merit pay is quite good. The best teachers get the best pay, the worst teachers get the worst. Seems reasonable.

    The problem is evaluating teachers. There's no real way to do it. The standardized testing idea put forth by HB1234 won't evaluate anything but a teacher's ability to teach to the test (instead of teaching the subject, more on that in a moment) or a teacher's ability to help their students cheat ("their" being a totally acceptable word for "his or her" going back several hundred years, contrary to what they teach you in school!).

    For those not knowledgeable about teaching (clearly almost the entire SDGOP), "teaching to the test" is a horrible method, especially when it comes to science and math, which is HB1234's main focus. Take math, for example. Until you get to Calculus, math is the same thing over and over. Basically, you plug numbers into an equation and get an answer! There's little else to algebra or trigonometry than that. And that's how a teacher teaches to the test. They teach you how to put the numbers where they go in certain problems. They teach shortcuts and memorization of equations.

    The real way a teacher should teach math, that standardized testing does not allow for, and merit pay messes up, is actually teaching the concepts. A^2+B^2=C^2, yeah, but why? Why do we do this, or that, or the other thing in mathematics? What point does doing this serve other than being homework?

    I know many math students at DSU who could jump straight into calculus out of high school because they'd learned the rest, already. They had teachers who carefully taught them how to do math, not just how to "plug n' chug". I had to take algebra and trigonometry again, because my high school math teacher taught "to the test". His students did quite well on standardized tests, but none of us actually knew how to do the problems. We didn't understand the concepts behind things, because he never taught them to us, and as high school students, we were all happy about it because in high school, all a student cares about is not doing anything.

    There's no possible way to evaluate how good a teacher is compared to other teachers, at least not if you want students to actually learn anything. So while the concept of merit pay is good, it can't hold up in real life. There's no way to do it, so instead of trying to find the way that it doesn't work the least, how about taking your time (and spending our tax money) on improving continuing education for teachers (this is already mandatory, I believe, but no harm can be done by improving it), improving access to that continuing education, and making South Dakota a more attractive place for teachers to come teach, instead of paying only the ones you ignorantly declare the "best" a competitive salary and paying the rest one of the lowest salaries in the nation?

  20. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.03

    ...and even if we can evaluate quality teachers, we labor unde rthe fear that decisions will be based more, as Rep. Nelson suggests with his ominous laughter, on local politics and other non-performance-related factors.

  21. Carter 2012.06.03

    Ah, let me add that increasing overall teacher pay would have a much more profound effect on how good teachers are, in general, than giving raises to the ones we think deserve it.

    At the moment, our pool of teachers in South Dakota consist of a small percentage of teachers who really like South Dakota, are heavily invested in South Dakota, etc., who stay here because it's South Dakota (or for other reasons, that's not the point), and a much larger percentage of teachers who are here because they can't get jobs in better paying states, probably because they're not good enough.

    If we increase teacher pay, we attract more of the best teachers. Right now, school districts all over don't have the option of firing their worst teachers because they don't have replacements. Bad teachers stay in place because there is no one else to teach that subject. Increase the pool of potential teachers, and you'll suddenly see the bad ones being culled and good ones replacing them.

    So, we'll end up with good South Dakota teachers and good teachers from out of state, and lose the bad teachers from South Dakota and the bad teachers from out of state.

    As a soon-to-be CSC/MATH graduate from DSU, I can tell you that pay comparison is a pretty big thing. I can make much more doing the same thing on the West Coast than I can here in South Dakota, and so there's no real reason for me to stay. Why be paid less for doing something, when I could be paid more?

    It's the same with teachers. If Cory was less invested in South Dakota, why would he stick around South Dakota if he could get better pay in Maryland, for example? So he moves and is replaced by some guy who barely scraped by getting his degree and barely understands his subject. If Cory had been paid competitively from the beginning, he would stick around, and his competition would end up being other qualified teachers. If he lost his job, it wouldn't be because he didn't meet some arbitrary standardized test requirement, it would be because someone even better came along. Even if a good teacher loses their job to a better teacher due to a competitive market, is that not a boon to the students?

    No hidden agenda in picking you out, Cory. I'm just using you as an example.

  22. Jana 2012.06.03

    Forget about the money and merit pay for a second...in comparison to the $5 million they are spending on socializing risk and privatizing profits to an out of state employment firm to find 1000 skilled workers for a small number of private employers.

    My thought of what the governor's young idealogues are interested in is joining their radical right peers in other red states (and ALEC) in busting up any perceived organized education voting bloc. (I think they get a ALEC merit badge for the effort.) This is about what they want people to believe is the bogey man of tenure and what in reality is a continuing contract. This is about getting rid of more experienced teachers who have earned higher salaries.

    Just a thought...

  23. lrads1 2012.06.03

    Cory, your blog platform needs a "like" button like Facebook has so I can hit it for Carter's comments. He makes a great deal of good sense: he paints a picture of the real life decisions of teachers who will or will not be teachers in South Dakota, because of decisions made by others who do not seem to make the critical connections.

  24. caheidelberger Post author | 2012.06.04

    ...ah, but a nice written compliment like that means so much more to my friend Carter. :-)

    ALEC merit badges—yikes!

  25. Carter 2012.06.04

    They do, indeed, lrads1. Thank you! I appreciate the appreciation.

Comments are closed.