Richard Schwab Writes

Super PACs a corrupting influence on American politics

In this Presidential election cycle, we are experiencing, for the first time, the influence of Super PACs.

They can raise as much money as they want. They can spend as much money as they want

Super PACs exist because of Citizens United, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 ruling against limits on spending by independent political action committees.

The Court said that as long as these committees were independent and didn't give money to candidates, they had no limit at all on what they could spend based on the principle of free speech.

Candidates are allowed to fund raise for these supposedly wholly independent committees. And, close aides, fundraisers, and relatives of the candidates run the Super PACs. The Court did not anticipate the extent to which PAC spending is closely tied to the candidates.

U.S. Senator John McCain blasted the Supreme Court's Citizen United decision which has given rise to the Super PACs and allows corporations to funnel as much money as they'd like into our elections. Senator McCain (who has been a long time advocate for campaign finance reform) said the court's ruling was, "one of the worst decisions I have ever seen." He went on to say, "I predict to you that there will be huge scandals associated with this huge flood of money."

Restore Our Future, a Super PAC supporting former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, Make Us Greater Again, a Super PAC supporting Texas Governor Rick Perry, and Winning Our Future, a Super Pac supporting former House Speaker Newt Gingrich have already spent millions on predominantly negative attack adds and have had a significant impact on the Republican Presidential nomination process.

A Super PAC has been established to support President Barack Obama's re election.

In addition, there are dozens upon dozens of Super PACs that will be supporting or attacking congressional candidates.

This Presidential election year will be a corrosive year because of the toxic influence of Super PACs. People are going to be offended on all sides - conservatives, moderates, and liberals - to see how these PACs taint and change America's electoral process.

The Supreme Court was wrong in thinking you could have independent spending that was going to be totally independent of candidates. If it's wholly independent, it can't be corrupting. Problem is when someone gives $5 million to Winning Our Future, Newt Gingrich knows exactly who it is.

The Supreme Court's narrow decision, where they voted 5-4 to say corporations are people and money is speech, needs to be reversed or scaled back.

Money is not speech; money can stifle speech. Corporations are important, but they're not people.

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 Schwab Writes

Raucous, rabble-roused Republicans show a nasty streak

The long string of Republican debates have shown a Republican party exposed - not on the stage but in the audience.

Moderator Wolf Blitzer asked Ron Paul, "What do you tell a guy who is sick, goes into a coma and doesn't have health insurance? Who pays for his coverage? Are you saying society should just let him die?" The crowd yelled "Yeah!" and cheered.

"Your state has executed 234 death row inmates, more than any governor in modern times," NBC's Brian Williams told Rick Perry. The audience broke into cheers and applause.

Host Megyn Kelly played a YouTube video from Steven Hill, a gay soldier in Iraq. After Hill's video clip, in a shocking demonstration of disrespect for one of our American soldiers, audience members lustily booed him.

Herman Cain and Michelle Bachman both voiced their opinions in support of water boarding and torture. The Republican crowd cheered.

Newt Gingrich stood by his remarks where he said children from low-income households should be given the opportunity to be janitors in their own schools. Gingrich was asked by commentator Juan Williams, "Can't you see that this is viewed, at a minimum, as insulting to all Americans, but particularly to black Americans?" Gingrich responded, "No, I don't see that." The GOP audience whooped and cheered.

Boos at the suggestion that the federal government, not the states, should enforce immigration laws. Boos at anything less than a send-them-all-back immigration policy.

The format of these Republican debates leads to snappy sound bites designed to play to the crowd. The results are rowdy and revealing.

When considering solutions to serious and sensitive issues that impact our society, cheering for people with no health insurance to die, cheering executions and torture, cheering children working as janitors, and booing a soldier because he is gay are inappropriate, out-of-touch, and offensive responses. However at the Republican debates the mere mention of these matters gets the conservative crowd out of their seats and stirred into a mindless, emotional frenzy.

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 Schwab Writes

Obama battling against inequality

Over a century ago, in Osawatomie, Kansas, President Theodore Roosevelt's "New Nationalism" speech took on Wall Street.

On December 6, 2011, at Osawatomie High School, Barack Obama channeled Teddy Roosevelt with a populist and powerful speech, laying out his vision and the themes of the 2012 election.

It was a sweeping indictment of economic inequality in the U.S. and a pledge to fight for fairness for the middle class.

President Obama declared, "It's not a view that we should somehow turn back technology or put up walls around America. It's not a view that says we should punish profit or success or pretend that government knows how to fix all society's problems. It's a view that says in America, we are greater together - when everyone engages in fair play, everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share."

In the speech, President Obama said, the number one, defining challenge for the country is income inequality - the giant gap between the middle class and the richest, and between the bottom of the income scale and the richest in America. Things are out of balance, people aren't getting fair shakes. You can't get ahead even if you work hard and you play by the rules.

We have had inequality rising over a decade in which most people have gotten essentially no raise. And, over the last three years, they've gotten whacked by the great recession.

The President made the case that in closing this gap, the government has to be a force. This is a direct contrast to the let markets rule and the get-government-out-of-the-way approach of the Tea Party and many conservatives.

President Obama planted a flag. He has set up, both in the Washington policy fights and in the political 2012 campaign, a very clear difference. The American people have a distinct choice when it comes to economics, Wall Street reform, consumer protection, taxes, and spending in 2012.

What has the conversation been in Washington since the 2010 election? The deficit and debt. Not much has been accomplished and the Super Committee failed.

This summer President Obama really tried to do a bipartisan major deficit and debt reduction with a grand bargain where there would be substantial revenue increases and significant cut backs on spending. It didn't work. The White House has rightly concluded that Republicans have no interest in cooperating.

And, since this summer, as in the case of the Osawatomie, Kansas speech, President Obama has said, no, we're not going to talk about bipartisan deficit reduction - we're going to talk about jobs and about moving the economy forward.

President Obama no longer talks about cooperating with Republicans. He is in their faces.

In the Dec. 6, 2011 speech, President Obama said not only is the middle class not getting a fair deal, but Republicans are part of the reason why.

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 Schwab Writes

Super PACs a corrupting influence on American politics

In this Presidential

election cycle, we are experiencing, for the first time, the influence of Super PACs.

They can raise as much money as they want. They can spend as much money as they want

Super PACs exist because of Citizens United, the U.S. Supreme Court's 2010 ruling against limits on spending by independent political action committees.

The Court said that as long as these committees were independent and didn't give money to candidates, they had no limit at all on what they could spend based on the principle of free speech.

Candidates are allowed to fund raise for these supposedly wholly independent committees. And, close aides, fundraisers, and relatives of the candidates run the Super PACs. The Court did not anticipate the extent to which PAC spending is closely tied to the candidates.

U.S. Senator John McCain blasted the Supreme Court's Citizen United decision which has given rise to the Super PACs and allows corporations to funnel as much money as they'd like into our elections. Senator McCain (who has been a long time advocate for campaign finance reform) said the court's ruling was, "one of the worst decisions I have ever seen." He went on to say, "I predict to you that there will be huge scandals associated with this huge flood of money."

Restore Our Future, a Super PAC supporting former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, Make Us Greater Again, a Super PAC supporting Texas Governor Rick Perry, and Winning Our Future, a Super Pac supporting former House Speaker Newt Gingrich have already spent millions on predominantly negative attack adds and have had a significant impact on the Republican Presidential nomination process.

A Super PAC has been established to support President Barack Obama's re election.

In addition, there are dozens upon dozens of Super PACs that will be supporting or attacking congressional candidates.

This Presidential election year will be a corrosive year because of the toxic influence of Super PACs. People are going to be offended on all sides - conservatives, moderates, and liberals - to see how these PACs taint and change America's electoral process.

The Supreme Court was wrong in thinking you could have independent spending that was going to be totally independent of candidates. If it's wholly independent, it can't be corrupting. Problem is when someone gives $5 million to Winning Our Future, Newt Gingrich knows exactly who it is.

The Supreme Court's narrow decision, where they voted 5-4 to say corporations are people and money is speech, needs to be reversed or scaled back.

Money is not speech; money can stifle speech. Corporations are important, but they're not people.

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 Schwab Writes

Electronic textbooks in U.S. schools by 2017

Plans are in the works to get all U.S. students from kindergarten through 12th grade digitally connected in five years.

Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Julius Genachowski and U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan have joined efforts to bring digital textbooks to U.S. students.

Genachowski and Duncan have launched (on 2/1/12) the Obama administration's "Digital Textbook Playbook." A resource designed by the Digital Textbook Collaborative. The "Playbook" is designed to guide educators in their transition from primarily print to mostly electronic resources.

The Digital Textbook Collaborative is a group convened by the Obama administration. It includes over two-dozen companies and organizations including Apple, Microsoft; the three biggest textbook publishers: Houghton-Mifflin Harcourt, McGraw-Hill, Pearson; and Sprint, and Verizon.

The "Digital Textbook Playbook" guides schools by addressing four main transition issues:

•Switching content to digital formats.

•Establishing internet connectivity throughout the school.

•Establishing internet connectivity throughout the community the school serves.

•Tailoring content to meet the capabilities of particular interactive learning devices used by students.

This initiative does not call for additional U.S. government funding.

The FCC currently provides more than $2.25 billion annually to connect U.S. schools and libraries to high-speed internet service. The FCC now has a pilot program for supporting wireless connectivity for mobile learning devices.

The U.S. currently spends $7 billion a year on textbooks.

The FCC, the U.S. Department of Education, and the Digital Textbook Collaborative will be recommending that states modify the textbook adoption process - allowing K-12 schools to use taxpayer funds (reserved for printed textbooks) on iPads, Kindles, and the like.

In addition, the Obama administration will begin pushing publishers, computer tablet makers, and internet service providers to work together and lower costs. The carrot being the sale of their products to the nation's 50 million school children.

The current K-12 textbook market is antiquated.

Improvements to digital versions of textbooks include interactive, video, and search features. The beefed-up educational content of e-textbooks can offer lesson plans personalized to learning styles and levels, and enable real-time feedback to teachers, tutors, and parents.

I applaud the Obama administration's federal-state-private partnership to drive innovation and the integration of technology into the classrooms, curricula, and the entire educational process in our nation's schools.

The "Digital Textbook Playbook" is a game plan to give high-quality, up-to-date, individualized, and standards-alligned resources to every student in America.

The Obama administration realizes, in order to win the future, our nation's schools need to out-educate the rest of the world.

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)