Richard Schwab Writes

Sandusky scandal should shake up football's domination of higher education






Former Penn State assistant football coach (defensive coordinator) Jerry Sandusky has been charged with sexually abusing eight young boys, sometimes in the campus athletic facilities, over a fifteen year period. He faces a forty count indictment.

The allegations against Sandusky have toppled long-time head football coach, Joe Paterno and University President, Graham Spanier.

Penn State Athletic Director, Tim Curly and Vice President for Finance and Business, Gary Schultz face charges of perjury and failure to report under Pennsylvania child protective services law.

The Pennsylvania Attorney General has blasted Penn State for failure to report suspected sexual abuse of young boys. University individuals warned university administrators about suspected abuse more than a decade ago.

How can this be? What's wrong with this picture?

At Penn State, the head football coach had more power than the university's President. College head football coaches bring in the cash and are extremely well compensated.

USA Today's 2010 analysis of college football salaries revealed sixty football coaches who make more than $1 million a year. Alabama pays $5.1 million, Iowa pays $3.8 million; the average pay for a major college football coach is $1.36 million. Some football coaches earn 5 to 10 times what is paid to their school's President.

At Penn State, Paterno's football program generated $50 million in one season according to the U.S. Department of Education. Last year, the football teams in the six major conferences made a combined profit of $1.1 billion.

Penn State's failure to report the child abuse allegations resulted from an imbalance of power.

An inner circle of power that was all about protecting the university's image and its cash-cow football program. As a result, nobody stopped things when they should have. As a result, nobody was looking after the best interests of children.

College Presidents should use the Penn State tragedy to re establish their schools' educational missions and deal directly with the commercialization and excess of college football which make the football coach the most powerful person on campus.

University Presidents and the NCAA should unite and consider establishing a salary cap for their head football coaches. How about $400,000.? A salary in line with the average pay of college Presidents.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

A One-Two Punch

A one two punch! My Column, "Occupy Wall Street far more popular than Tea Party" and GOFACT Volunteer Recruitment Coordinator Paul Breidenbach's brilliantly sarcastic Letter To The Editor, "Forum's objectivity questioned" are published in today's Tri-County Press. I have copied both below.


"Occupy wall street far more popular than tea party"

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that Americans support the Occupy Wall Street protesters by a two-to-one margin (37% in favor, 18% opposed.) While more Americans view the Tea Party negatively (28% in favor, 41% opposed.)
And, a recent Time Magazine poll found even more positive results for Occupy Wall Street, showing 54% held a favorable view of the movement, compared to just 27% with a favorable view of the Tea Party.

Why is this? Because there is a deep strain of anti-establishment feeling in America which started at the end of the Bush Administration. It is the reason Barack Obama was elected.

Both the Tea Party and the Occupy movement share a frustration. Though they are very different in the objects of their frustration. Occupy is frustrated with the financial system. The Tea Party is frustrated with government.

Occupy is concerned with social and economic inequality, corporate greed and influence over government. Occupy's slogan, "we are the 99%" refers to income inequality in the U.S. between the top 1%, who control 40% of the wealth, and the rest of the population. The Tea party looks at politicians and government as the problem and has the backing of billionaires like the Koch brothers.

Occupy looks at the influence of money, Wall Street, and big banks on government and elected officials as the problem. The movement is in 70 cities and 600 communities throughout the country.

A Washington Post- Pew Research Center poll shows the majority of Tea Party support comes from Republicans, while backing for Occupy protests arises from Democrats. Occupy has met with near universal derision from Republicans. Mitt Romney called them "dangerous." House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) claimed they were a "mob." Herman Cain denounced them as "un-American." Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) said the protests were an "attack upon freedom."

Is it any surprise the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (signed into law 7/21/10) passed the House along party lines (223 -202) and the Senate (59 - 39) once again along party lines? The GOP continues to paint the law as big- government over regulation.

A volunteer with Occupy Wall Street stated, "business folks should be able to make money... but we have to have a culture to come together, take care of each other, and make sure that the consolidation of wealth and power doesn't mean that folks who have the most are also rigging the game for the future. And that's what's happening."

This is a social justice message that is consistent with the traditional Democratic message. That's why if there was a logical political alignment for the Occupy movement, it would be with the Democratic party.

For sure, neither Occupy protesters or Democrats want to promote the Bush legacy of unregulated speculation which does harm to our economy and communities.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head,

Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Paul Breidenbach Speaks (Be Prepared for Great Irony)

This appeared in this week's Community Press along with another sensational article by Richard Schwab, which we shall post next:

Forum's Objectivity Questioned

I was happy to attend a candidates' forum last week at Glendale's Town Hall, which gave me confidence that Glendale and the Princeton City Schools will be in reasonably good hands no matter what the outcome of the local races that will be decided early November.

The event did make me wonder about the sponsorship, though. It was put on in this case by a coalition between MoveOn.org, Occupy Wall Street, and GOFACT, which claim to be non-partisan voter-education organizations, but are actually closely aligned with a particular party and a narrow set of policy options. Since these organizations chose the questions the candidates answered, we were treated to the usual boilerplate:

-- how to opt out of the ridiculous testing spiral that's ruining the public schools that work and doing nothing to improve the ones that don't;

--whether we can pool Glendale citizens to purchase health insurance;

--how to induce hugely profitable corporations like GE to support the local schools;

--how to take advantage of the linguistic gifts of immigrant children in our schools to teach foreign languages in the primary grades;

--how much of the greenbelt we should plant with cannabis for the dispensaries and the Amsterdam Cafe on the square;

--whether Glendale should impose a tax on calls that go through the architectural gem that Cincinnati Bell built on Sharon Road.

The event made me wonder if the electorate might be better served if forums like this one were sponsored by truly neutral organizations, for instance the Glendale Tea Party. The result might be a outside-the-box discussion of innovative ideas for dealing with the challenges that face us, ideas that people might not have had much chance to hear, such as tightening our belts and keeping taxes low. Just a thought.

Connie and Daughter

Our next congresswoman, and her daughter.  GOFACT got her over the top in Glendale, along with Connie's tireless efforts!

Richard Schwab Writes

Occupy wall street far more popular than tea party




A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that Americans support the Occupy Wall Street protesters by a two-to-one margin (37% in favor, 18% opposed.) While more Americans view the Tea Party negatively (28% in favor, 41% opposed.)



And, a recent Time Magazine poll found even more positive results for Occupy Wall Street, showing 54% held a favorable view of the movement, compared to just 27% with a favorable view of the Tea Party.



Why is this?

Because there is a deep strain of anti-establishment feeling in America which started at the end of the Bush Administration. It is the reason Barack Obama was elected.



Both the Tea Party and the Occupy movement share a frustration. Though they are very different in the objects of their frustration. Occupy is frustrated with the financial system. The Tea Party is frustrated with government.



Occupy is concerned with social and economic inequality, corporate greed and influence over government. Occupy's slogan, "we are the 99%" refers to income inequality in the U.S. between the top 1%, who control 40% of the wealth, and the rest of the population.



The Tea party looks at politicians and government as the problem and has the backing of billionaires like the Koch brothers.



Occupy looks at the influence of money, Wall Street, and big banks on government and elected officials as the problem. The movement is in 70 cities and 600 communities throughout the country.



A Washington Post- Pew Research Center poll shows the majority of Tea Party support comes from Republicans, while backing for Occupy protests arises from Democrats. Occupy has met with near universal derision from Republicans. Mitt Romney called them "dangerous." House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) claimed they were a "mob." Herman Cain denounced them as "un-American." Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) said the protests were an "attack upon freedom."



Is it any surprise the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (signed into law 7/21/10) passed the House along party lines (223 -202) and the Senate (59 - 39) once again along party lines? The GOP continues to paint the law as big- government over regulation.



A volunteer with Occupy Wall Street stated, "business folks should be able to make money... but we have to have a culture to come together, take care of each other, and make sure that the consolidation of wealth and power doesn't mean that folks who have the most are also rigging the game for the future. And that's what's happening."

This is a social justice message that is consistent with the traditional Democratic message. That's why if there was a logical political alignment for the Occupy movement, it would be with the Democratic party.



And for sure, neither Occupy protesters or Democrats want to promote the Bush legacy of unregulated speculation which does harm to our economy and communities.



Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Richard O. Schwab

830 Congress Ave.

Glendale, Ohio 45246

H.513-771-4397

Richard Schwab Writes

Investing in our economy, our workers, and our future

I think President Obama's $450 billion "American Jobs Act" is right on.

It proposes:

•Cutting the payroll tax in half for 98 % of businesses.

•A complete payroll tax holiday for added workers or increased wages.

•A "Returning Heroes" hiring tax credit for veterans.

•Preventing up to 280,000 teacher layoffs, while keeping police and firefighters on the job.

•Modernizing at least 35,000 public schools across the country - creating jobs and improving classrooms to meet twenty-first century needs.

•Immediate investments in infrastructure and a bipartisan National Infrastructure Bank.

•A New "Project Rebuild," which will put people to work rehabilitating homes, businesses, and communities.

•Expanding access to high-speed wireless.

•Extending unemployment insurance to prevent 5 million Americans looking for work from losing their benefits, and innovative work-based reforms to prevent layoffs and to give states greater flexibility to use UI funds.

•A $4,000 tax credit to employers for hiring long-term unemployed workers.

•Expanding the payroll tax cut passed last year to cut workers payroll taxes in half in 2012.

•Providing a $1,500 tax cut to the typical American family.

•Allowing more Americans to refinance their mortgages at today's near 4 percent interest rates.

We need smart government for a strong economy. We need smart government to get America back into the future.

Our ability to compete in the twenty-first century is dependent on our willingness to invest in our infrastructure.

We need faster broad band, a state-of-the art national electrical grid, modernized water and sewage systems, the best airports, trains, roads, and bridges.

There is no evidence we can succeed in the twenty-first century with an anti-government strategy. Austerity is the wrong course right now. Cutting government programs and public employee jobs just adds to our economic problems.

The American Jobs Act does not add a dime to our deficit.

The President pays for The Act in large part by requiring the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share. The President has proposed that those who earn more than $1 million a year pay the same share of their income in taxes as middle-class families do. Everyone paying a fair share to get a fair shake is the practical and balanced way forward. The alternative is to diminish education, decimate medicare, let roads and bridges further decay, and whittle-down social security.

Results of a September 14 CNN/ORC national survey revealed, " Who do you trust more to handle the economy? Obama: 46% ... Republicans: 37% -- Obama and Congress should pay more attention to Jobs: 65% ... Deficit: 29% -- Obama jobs plan: Favor: 43% ... Oppose: 35%."

Austerity doesn't produce jobs or growth. It is not how we cut; it is how we can grow.

Let's prove the cynics and naysayers wrong and support President Obama's effort to create jobs in America.

Richard O. Schwab was formerly associate head of school, and middle school head, Cincinnati Country Day School. He is currently neighborhood team leader, Glendale Organizing For America Community Team (www.gofact.blogspot.com)

Clarence Thomas -- Jeffrey Toobin's Shocking and Surprising Article in the New Yorker

Chabot to Allow Cameras

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0811/62278.html#continue 

Pepper on Agenda at October 4th Senate Bill 5 Issue Forum

From: Blatz, Jennifer [mailto:BlatzJ@strivenetwork.org]

Sent: Monday, August 29, 2011 11:29 AM

To: garygreenberg@drgfirm.com ; Pepper, David A.

Subject: Update on October 4th Senate Bill 5 Issue Forum



Dear Mr. Greenberg and Mr. Pepper:

I hope this email finds you both well. I wanted to take a moment to provide an update on the planning for the October 4th Issue Forum on Senate Bill 5 that is being organized by the Junior League of Cincinnati, League of Women Voters and Cincinnati Museum Center. We are very excited about this event and we thank you both for your willingness to participate.



We are still in the planning stages, but I can update you on some of the logistics we have been able to nail down thus far:



Location: Cincinnati Museum Center Auditorium (capacity 285)

Timing: 7:15-8:30 p.m.

Moderator: Maryanne Zeleznik (WVXU)

Speakers: Support of Senate Bill 5 – Gary Greenberg, partner with Denlinger, Rosenthal & Greenberg, LPA, which focuses on labor and employment law

Repeal of Senate Bill 5 – David Pepper, former Cincinnati City Council member and Chair, Protect Ohio’s Future PAC



We are planning a meeting with Maryanne Zeleznik in the next week to finalize the format for the discussion. What I am sharing below is a tentative format, subject to change after conversations with our moderator:



Tentative Format (as of 8/29):

i. 7:20-7:23 – Welcome by Melanie Chavez, President, JLC (set the framework for the event and partnership with CMC and LWV; Melanie to introduce Doug McDonald, President, CMC

ii. 7:23-7:26 – Welcome by Doug McDonald, including introduction of Moderator

iii. 7:26-7:32 – Chronology of SB5 and Introduction of speakers (Zeleznik)

iv. 7:32-8:28 – Issue Forum, Moderated by Maryanne Zeleznik (WVXU)

• 10 questions, 2 minutes each (40 minutes)

• Moderator to ask follow-up questions and give rebuttal if necessary as she deems appropriate (10 minutes)

• 3 minutes for each speaker to close (6 minutes)

v. 8:28-8:30 – Closing by Sarah Moore, JLC Public Affairs Chair and Vicki Calonge, JLC Projects Council VP



I’ll be back in touch following our meeting with Maryanne with more details related to format, but if you have any questions in the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact me. Also, if you could forward me your bios or how you’d like to be introduced as part of this Forum I would greatly appreciate it.



Finally, we are working on several media partners and since we expect to have a capacity crowd for this event, given the partners involved, we hope to be able to televise or broadcast the forum to the general public via television or radio or both. If you have any concerns about that, please let me know.



Thank you again for your participation in this event. I look forward to meeting you both.



Jennifer





Jennifer C. Blatz

Director of Partner Engagement and Advocacy

Strive

A Subsidiary of KnowledgeWorks

One West Fourth Street, Suite 200

Cincinnati, OH 45202

513-929-1146 (o)

513-659-0230 (m)

513-929-1122 (f)

blatzj@strivenetwork.org

www.strivenetwork.org





---------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is confidential and may be legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone or email the sender and delete this message and any attachment from your system; you must not copy or disclose the contents of this message or any attachment to any other person.



Squire, Sanders & Dempsey (US) LLP is part of the international legal practice Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, which operates worldwide through a number of separate legal entities. Please visit www.ssd.com for more information.



#SSDUS

---------------------------------------------------------------------