Photo credit: www.yahoo.com
Stitt’s logic confusing on virtual learning
The recent actions by Governor Kevin Stitt and several state lawmakers raise questions about their stance on virtual learning in public education.
While Stitt aims to abolish virtual learning days in public schools, he is also advocating for a substantial allocation of $25.7 million over the next five years to support St. Isidore, a fully virtual charter school that plans to have daily online learning. This apparent contradiction reflects a troubling inconsistency in educational policy.
Moreover, Stitt’s office mentioned that charter schools face no requirements regarding their operations. This raises concerns about the prudent use of taxpayer money, particularly when it comes to ensuring effective educational standards before dispersing millions in funding. It appears paradoxical for Stitt to promote a ban on virtual days by 2025 while simultaneously committing taxpayer resources to a charter institution that embodies the virtual model.
This inconsistency may contribute to Oklahoma’s ranking of 49th in terms of educational performance. Could these contradictory policies be part of a broader issue affecting the state’s education system?
― Janis Blevins, Oklahoma City
Want the latest Viewpoints? Sign up for the Oklahoma’s Public Square newsletter
Dangerous actions by Trump and Musk
Recent decisions by former President Trump and Elon Musk have sparked concern regarding their potential impact on critical federal programs. Trump’s abrupt cut to life-saving international aid has left American farmers grappling with surplus crops and public health agencies with unutilized supplies. These programs constitute a small fraction of the federal budget yet play a vital role in fostering goodwill and stability abroad.
In addition, Trump’s agenda includes the dismissal of numerous federal employees across several agencies, including the FBI and CIA. This raises alarms, especially considering the ongoing threats from terrorism, cybersecurity, and diseases like bird flu and tuberculosis, which demand a well-prepared workforce.
Elon Musk’s assertion that inexperienced tech workers can rapidly enhance FAA systems, built over years of careful evolution, invites skepticism. The risk of recklessly undermining established safety protocols in pursuit of efficiency could endanger public safety.
More: Dissolving USAID harms U.S. global influence and does not strengthen our nation | Opinion
Reports indicate that Trump and Musk may have breached multiple federal regulations in a matter of weeks, yet there appears to be little accountability, particularly from Republican legislators. What could explain this silence?
As discussions advance around another proposed tax cut, similar to those established in 2017, concerns are mounting that the financial benefits will largely favor the wealthy, with minimal relief for the middle and lower classes. The promises of a strong democracy and a thriving economy seem increasingly out of reach under the current administration’s actions.
So much for greatness.
― Scott McLaughin, Midwest City
Let’s not be hypocritical about President Trump
The reactions to Elon Musk’s involvement in advising President Trump highlight an apparent double standard in political discourse. Critics express outrage over the influence of young advisors, yet many remained silent during previous administrations regarding similar circumstances.
The knowledge gap surrounding organizations, like USAID, has also been notable, often only surfacing when brought into the public eye through social media. While some analysts criticize executive appointments made during the Trump administration, it is essential to recognize that every presidency involves personnel decisions that reflect campaign promises and ideological perspectives.
Trump’s actions align with his political philosophy, and he is simply leveraging the electoral outcome to further his agenda. History shows that each administration’s approach — whether it’s immigration or public safety — is influenced by the political context in which they operate.
In essence, criticisms of Trump’s decisions should consider the broader scope of executive behavior across administrations.
― Wayne Hull, Oklahoma City
More: What you should know about the Constitution’s limits on presidential powers | Opinion
Take back power from the political parties
Many citizens are expressing confusion and frustration regarding the current state of affairs in Washington, D.C. The sentiment appears to be that Congress has become ineffective, leaving the president to act outside traditional checks and balances.
President George Washington warned about the influence of political parties, stating that while they may serve popular interests occasionally, they can ultimately subvert democracy and allow unprincipled leaders to seize power.
“However political parties may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.”
If Congress continues to neglect its responsibilities, the balance of power could shift dramatically, potentially leading to authoritarian governance. Voters must be vigilant, ensuring that their representatives fulfill their obligations and act in service to their constituents.
Should Congress remain inactive, they will be held accountable during elections.
― Richard C. “Dick” Hall, Norman
Why remove some Board of Education members?
This week, Governor Kevin Stitt announced the replacement of three members of the state Board of Education, attributing the decision to subpar standardized test scores and ensuing controversies. He referenced Oklahoma’s low NAEP rankings, even though these members were his appointees, raising critical questions about his leadership choices.
If poor performance was indeed the rationale, one must wonder why only half the board was removed.
Further complicating matters, Stitt revised his justification, claiming that collecting certain demographic information for school enrollment was not a public safety concern. It appears that the governor may have targeted members who supported requirements for proof of citizenship or legal status for enrollment. If Stitt were genuinely committed to improving student outcomes, the more logical step would have been a comprehensive overhaul of the entire board.
This change raises concerns about the future of the Board’s agenda, particularly a key vote set for the end of the month concerning proposed academic standards, which includes a social studies curriculum developed in partnership with tribal nations.
The timeline for the state’s educational program is pressing. As long as Stitt’s appointees await confirmation by the Senate, the former board members may still hold office.
Crucially, the recent changes have led to the removal of the sole representative of federally recognized American Indian nations from the board, leaving a significant gap in representation for tribal interests.
Oklahomans are called upon to critically assess the motivations behind these shifts within the educational leadership.
― Theresa Hinman, Norman, a citizen of the Ponca Nation
This article originally appeared on Oklahoman: Exercising political power in Washington sparks conflict | Letters
Source
www.yahoo.com