Callahan a candidate in search of an issue

I think my readers know that I’m no fan of Aaron Schock. But seriously, is this the best his Democratic challenger can do?

Congressional candidate Colleen Callahan is criticizing her opponent Aaron Schock for spending too much time fundraising, being “AWOL” and not responding to issues.

Apparently, Callahan cut-and-pasted Karen McDonald’s “Word on the Street” column onto her campaign letterhead and faxed it out as a press release. And then McDonald dutifully reported on it. Talk about a “news cycle.”

Well, I guess it’s a win-win for Callahan and McDonald. Callahan gets some free publicity, and McDonald got Schock to finally return her call.

Peoria Urban Living Initiative wants your feedback

In November 2007, the city council approved a plan called The Peoria Urban Living Initiative. The goal of the initiative is to attract homeowners back to the Heart of Peoria. According to Chris Setti, the city’s Six Sigma black belt in charge of this project, “it has been a collaboration of the City, Caterpillar, OSF, Methodist, Bradley and the County. One method we are using to formulate our plan is to collect some feedback through a brief survey.”

The survey is online here. Please click on the link and take a minute to fill it out.

“The goal of the survey is to collect information on what people look for in a neighborhood, which types of incentives might be most attractive, and how much interest there is in certain areas of the City,” Setti tells me.

I’m not exactly clear as to why the Uplands and Arbor District neighborhoods were not included in the map of the “west bluff” on this survey. My guess is that they feel these are stable neighborhoods that need no help. I’d buy that for the Uplands, but the Arbor District is a different story since Bradley’s razing of two blocks of houses there to make way for a five-story parking deck. Dozens of homes there have turned from owner-occupied to rentals; that neighborhood will need as much incentivizing as any other neighborhood to get homeowners investing there again.

State Board of Education sees D150 plan differently than Regional Superintendent

You may recall that the Regional Superintendent of Schools, Gerald Brookhart, stated recently that District 150’s plan to shorten Wednesdays by 90 minutes each week conforms to the State’s school code. Well, apparently the Illinois State Board of Education sees things differently.

The school code requires students to receive a minimum of five clock hours (300 minutes) of instructional time per school day. If 90 minutes are cut from Wednesdays, then students would receive less than five instructional hours those days. District 150 tried to say that was acceptable because the average number of instructional hours per day over the course of a week would still be more than five. They also tried to label Wednesdays “improvement days,” which are covered by other provisions of the school code. Education reporter Dave Haney reports that ISBE officials rejected those arguments:

[The ISBE] said improvement days are designed for all schools in a district, not just certain schools as the district has proposed, and the half-days are limited to specific school improvement topics listed in the local school improvement plan.

What’s more, the ISBE said the school code mandates a minimum of 300 minutes of instruction every day.

In response, District 150 Superintendent Ken Hinton has floated the idea of only cutting 45 or 60 minutes from Wednesdays instead of 90. No matter what happens, Hinton is determined to cut at least some time from the school day. “‘The time to collaborate and look at the data, it has to happen – (teachers) just don’t have time to grow professionally,’ said Hinton, who added the district needs to implement change now if it wants to see drastic student improvement,” the Journal Star reported.

Hinton has never explained why the school day has to be cut in order to provide professional development time. The District 150 Watch group gave Hinton several suggestions for how that goal could be accomplished without cutting the school day. Why doesn’t he use one of those suggestions?

Do we really need a speech on patriotism?

Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama gave a speech all about patriotism today. You can read it here.

My reaction: Who cares? Can we talk about something relevant?

Obama says at the outset that the topic of patriotism “is worth considering…because the question of who is – or is not – a patriot all too often poisons our political debates, in ways that divide us rather than bringing us together.” So, I take that to mean his audience is those who question his patriotism. Is that really a large percentage of the population? Because I thought the only ones questioning his patriotism were those who believed anything and everything forwarded to them via e-mail — you know, those phony Internet rumors that he’s a Muslim, that he took his oath of office on the Koran, that he doesn’t say the Pledge of Allegiance, etc. Are those people likely to hear this speech, let alone believe it? And other than those people, who’s questioning his patriotism?

All I know is, I’d rather hear some substantive debates between the two candidates on the issues facing our country — in fact, some of the issues that Obama brought up himself at the beginning of the speech:

…health care, jobs, energy, education, and retirement security… [and] values. How do we keep ourselves safe and secure while preserving our liberties? How do we restore trust in a government that seems increasingly removed from its people and dominated by special interests? How do we ensure that in an increasingly global economy, the winners maintain allegiance to the less fortunate? And how do we resolve our differences at a time of increasing diversity?

A debate on any of those subjects would be welcome. This election isn’t a contest over who’s more patriotic, so let’s skip the rhetorical, platitude-filled speeches and get down to the nitty-gritty. That would be much more interesting and useful.