From today's Star Ledger:

It's not something steeped in tradition. This wasn't a platoon of firefighters, leaving a station adorned with black buntings, showing up at a funeral of a fallen comrade.

It was an inner-city football team -- West Side High School's Roughriders from Newark -- showing up at the wake of a suburban football player who died tragically during a practice. A boy they didn't know. A team they didn't play.

They kneeled at the coffin. Livington Steele, a 16-year-old running back and regular churchgoer, led his reaching-for-the-right-word teammates in the Lord's Prayer. They looked their own mortality in the eye.

For this, coach Brian Logan and his Roughriders, who ended the gridiron season with a 5-5 record, had a championship season of a special kind.

"In recognition of those who exemplify the best in sports," their plaque said, "The Institute for Coaching and the Yogi Berra Museum presents its Yogi to coach Brian Logan and his West Side High School football team." It was a first of its kind.

They left teary-eyed.

"They brought me all the way up here to break me down," an emotionally touched Logan said on Nov. 22, after he accepted the award at the Yogi Berra Museum and Learning Center on the campus of Montclair State University.

Even Yogi -- the American icon who saw the passing of such Yankee greats as Mickey Mantle -- was broken up. "I've been through a lot of what you've been through," said an emotional Berra, the Yankee Hall of Famer with the No. 8 jersey.

It all began Oct. 11, when James P. "Jamie" Bliss of Caldwell, the 175-pound, 6-foot-3 boy with the "impish grin" and the No. 81 jersey, collapsed on the practice field of the Chiefs at suburban -- and largely white -- James Caldwell High School.

A team doctor performed CPR, but the boy, who also was on the basketball and baseball teams, was pronounced dead at Mountainside Hospital at 4:45 p.m., apparently after suffering cardiac arrest. At his family's request, he was buried in his baseball uniform. [...]

His presence is still being felt at the home of Richard Lavorato, a 15-year-old James Caldwell soccer player whose screensaver sports a picture of Jamie on the pitcher's mound.

Young Lavorato had been to the wake when the West Side players arrived.

"Everyone's like, 'Why are they here? Who are they?'" he said. But he would soon realize the significance. It was not unlike a distant cousin being greeted at the wake of a relative he hadn't seen in years. "So much respect and honor. It's unbelievable, a team that barely knows him." [...]

As for coach Ken Trimmer, wearing his Chiefs jacket with wide blue and white stripes on his sleeves, the West Side team left an impression he won't soon forget.

"When you sat down and said the Lord's Prayer, there wasn't a dry eye in that funeral home," he said. "I am and always will be a West Side fan for the rest of my life. ... Again, thank you, thank you, from all our community."

For Logan, the honor was, in his own words, one of a lifetime. He thanked his godfather, Fernard Williams, the one-time West Side principal who gave him a shot at ending the school's 60-game losing streak. He thanked his players and staff. And he thanked a man who had been an "inspiration" to him, coach Trimmer.

It was all the result of West Side High's Roughriders' showing their soft side.

"We just felt it was the right thing to do," Logan said.

Asim Hicks, his 18-year-old team captain, was like-minded.

"Just like the coach said, football is a big fraternity, and it's a family. When all is said and done, we play a sport that we love."

In an example of how much like the Third World the United States has become, consider the following item from today's Star Ledger.

New Jersey business leaders have turned decidedly pessimistic about the coming year, according to a survey released yesterday by the New Jersey Business & Industry Association. At the heart of the survey, according to Kirschner, is the finding that only 17 percent of respondents rate New Jersey as a good place to expand their business, the lowest approval rating in the past 23 years.

Hughes said the attitude of business is based on what happened from 2002 to 2005, when the administration of former Gov. James McGreevey increased corporate tax collections by about $1 billion a year.

The current pessimism is a reaction to years of public policy from Trenton that predates Corzine, said Melanie Willoughby, chief lobbyist for the NJBIA. "Business has been hit by high taxes, fines and penalties; depending on your industry, there is some level or department that is taking you on in some way, shape or form in New Jersey, and that has created an overall feeling that government is not on their side and trying to help them grow, but sees them as a cash cow."

[The] Corzine administration has made property-tax reduction a top priority, and the governor's first budget repealed two much-despised business taxes. "It was the first state budget in six years with a net reduction in business taxes," he said. "The governor has made it clear time and again that he is very focused on improving the business climate, and we are committed to working with the business community to do that."

"The Corzine administration has been the first to recognize that business needs to be developed and helped because if business grows, you'll have more tax revenue coming in," Willoughby said.

It would be interesting to compare this article with corporate profits over the past 16 years, and with the personal worth of the people who were polled. The implicit threat is Capital Flight - which destroyed Newark in the 50's. Businesses threaten to close their plants and relocate their offices - in another US state, or abroad - making people lose their jobs, taking away what tax revenue they do provide, etc. UNLESS the government reduces taxes. Capital Flight is the implicit threat against ANY tax raise, and it is the reason why if democracy is to be meaningful it MUST be extended to decision-making over the economy.

Which is exactly what is happening in Bolivia. From the BBC:

The Bolivian Senate has approved a controversial reform bill proposed by President Evo Morales to redistribute under-used land to rural communities.

A week-long stand-off ended when three opposition senators broke ranks with their conservative parties to vote in favour of the bill.

Thousands of indigenous protesters had marched on La Paz on Tuesday to put pressure on the senate to pass the law.

It could lead to the redistribution of up to 20m hectares of land to the poor.

Big landowners oppose the move, saying it will destroy Bolivian agriculture, and have threatened to use force to defend their property.

A recent survey by the Catholic Church found that just 50,000 families own almost 90% of Bolivia's productive land.

Land reform is the reason why the US overthrew the democratically elected government of Guatemala in 1954, leading to several decades of state-sponsored bloodshed that claimed the lives of over 200,000 people. It is a major issue in Venezuela and Brazil. It is safe to say that the greater the strides toward land redistribution in a country, the more democratic the government. By this measure, the Lula administration in Brazil is failing the most in the eyes of Brazil's social movements, such as the MST.

Back to the point I was making in the beginning: when leftist or national governments are elected elsewhere in the world, multinational firms have favorite tactics to preserve their profits: the threat or practice of Capital Flight, or US military or covert intervention. So, for example, Lula doen't get any "funny ideas" about nationalizing industries. In New Jersey and Newark, the proposal has been on the table for a commuter tax: all of the white-collar workers who come to Newark should pay some part of their income to the city. Well, the answer is the same: don't do it or we'll pull out and leave.

Bolivia is making the right choice, with popular muscle to defend it. We should be part of the popular muscle defending similar choices here.

C'e' oggi un articolo sulla pagina degli affari del New York Times che discute la "partita a tre" che si sta giocando sulla televisione italiana: RAI (lo stato), Mediaset (Berlusconi) e SKY (Murdoch).

Sembra che la legge proposta da Prodi riguardo al "conflitto di interessi" possa finire semplicemente con l'indebolire Berlusconi (diretto avversario politico dell'attuale governo) solo per favorire Murdoch, ultramiliardario che negli Stati Uniti e' responsabile di una "televisione di notizie 24 ore su 24" a dir poco raccapricciante, che si e' (giustamente, a mio parere) meritata l'immagine satirica qui di fianco.

Sara' mai possibile che un governo (cosi' dicono) di sinistra non sia capace di una svolta che favorisca l'interesse comune piuttosto che un freddo calcolo politico di breve termine?

Com'e' possibile che Prodi e Compagnia bella non si rendano conto della trappola posta da Murdoch? Lui detesta tutto cio' per il quale loro si battono (o perlomeno dicono di battersi, o perlomeno ho l'impressione che almeno dicano di battersi).

Negli Stati Uniti c'e' un movimento per la riforma dei media (di cui e' esponente di spicco il neoeletto senatore Bernie Sanders): in Italia c'e'?

mi trovo nuovamente a pensare che una attivita' utile per la cittadinanza di Pistoia sia la creazione di fonti mediatiche alternative a quelle padronali e statali...

Giovedi a Pistoia aprira' il centro commerciale.sotto casa mia. Sembra un nuovo chiodo nella bara dei commercianti locali (quali il Selmi, uno degli ultimi rimasti in centro) a favore di un capitale piu' sfuggevole, meno controllabile, meno legato al territorio.

Ci saranno (e ci sono gia' stati) cambiamenti urbanistici. Quali saranno gli effetti sulla vita civica di Pistoia e sulla vita del quartiere Le Fornaci?

Una grande differenza tra il centro di Pistoia e questo centro commerciale e' la differenza tra uno spazio PUBBLICO, dove si puo' parlare di politica e proselitizzare su questioni sociali, e uno spazio PRIVATO, dove si pu' fare solo quello che decide il padrone, e l'unico messaggio che e' legittimo trasmettere e' un messaggio commerciale.

In piu', cosa significa la creazione di questo spazio per i lavoratori di Pistoia? Verranno creati lavori dignitosi o si propaghera' ancora di piu' il precariato?

Senator Menendez/Lautenberg

i was appalled to see that you voted in favor of H.R. 5682 (A bill to exempt from certain requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 a proposed nuclear agreement for cooperation with India).

I agree with the statement made by the Rome Declaration of Nobel Peace Laureates:

"We oppose the proliferation of nuclear weapons to any state. We are
faced each day with a new crisis in proliferation exemplified by
concerns regarding North Korea and Iran, however, our focus must be
on the weapons themselves for the only sustainable resolution to gain
security is the universal elimination of the weapons.

Nuclear weapons are more of a problem than any problem they seek
to solve. In the hands of anyone, the weapons themselves remain an
unacceptable, morally reprehensible, impractical and dangerous risk."

The legitimization of India's military nuclear program moves exactly in the wrong direction. I hope that you will reconsider your vote when the bill comes for final approval.

The United Nations General Assembly is considering the adoption of the new Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. Four Countries, Botswana, Canada, New Zealand, and (surprise) the United States, are delaying and opposing the resolution.

You can read the comments made by the US mission to the UN about the declaration on their website -and there is also contact information for them.

However, Bolton (the UN ambassador) doesn't make the decisions - he takes orders from his boss Condoleeza Rice at the State Department. Here is contact info for the State Department.

You can follow this issue on the website of the United Nations permanent forum on Indigenous Issues.

Ambassador Bolton,

            We read with dismay the statement made by Ambassador Sanders regarding the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous people.

            It seems that the main thrust of the objections listed by Ambassador Sanders is that “the United States rejects any possibility that this document is or can become customary international law.” As you are well aware, the Declaration is not legally binding: it is a statement of principles and ideals.

            As US citizens and taxpayers, we would support the extension of Customary International Law to include some of the values listed in the Declaration. But we know, as well as you do, that without further legislative action on part of the UN General Assembly, (such as the adoption of a legally binding Convention on the Rights of Indigenous People), the possibility of this Declaration becoming part if Customary International Law is exactly zero. Therefore, the main objection seems to be moot.

            Furthermore, the Declaration does not, nor would it be anyone’s intention for it to “create” new rights – and certainly no legally actionable rights – especially for indigenous people, beyond the scope of what is contemplated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The objections set forth by Ambassador Sanders therefore seem to be greatly exaggerated.

            By opposing the Declaration, the United States is taking yet one more action in opposition to what is a broad international consensus, and appealing once again to a principle of “American exceptionalism” which we disagree with, and which does not help the United States create an atmosphere of cooperation in the international arena.

            Throughout its history, our government has not been fair to the indigenous people of this country. It is therefore all the more important for us to take (at the very least symbolic) steps to make amends – and one such step would be to support the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People.

            Sincerely,

Junius Williams makes many valid points in his critique of the "voucher-lite"
proposal currently languishing in Trenton. And there are other reasons why it
should stay dormant.

- First, private schools are not required administer the same standardized tests as public schools. Therefore, there would be no data to compare the academic achievement of students of color, poor students, ESL students, etc., to their peers in the same private school or in public schools.

-Second, private school students can be expelled, and there is no way to track who is expelled, for what
reason, or what happens to them after they are forced out.

-Third, the proposed law does not specify how private schools should deal with several subgroups of students who have very specific needs: children with learning disabilities, pregnant teens, and children with severe emotional needs among others.

Legislators should continue to use public funds for public schools.

Continuo ad espandere ed aggiornare il mio sito. In particolare la sezione Italia.

E grazie a Samuele per avermi indicato il sito internet dove si reperiscono tutti i video della trasmissione di giornalismo investigativo Report.

From the BBC

Schoolgirls chanting their defiance of Israel were among the crowd that gathered to defend the two-storey home in the town of Beit Lahiya.

Along with the girls had come old men, neighbours and militants.

All of them were ready to defy the Israeli air force. They were ready to put themselves in the line of fire.

But they knew too that a similar human shield tactic had worked a few days earlier.

The Israelis had backed off knowing that to strike would cause large numbers of civilian casualties which would, of course, have played very badly in the court of international opinion.

For years Palestinians have been completely at the mercy of the Israeli air force.

But they clearly believe that now they have found a weakness.

If they know an attack is coming they can probably foil it by massing in the target zone.

The Israelis can no longer expect to limit civilian casualties by calling ahead and clearing people out.

WASHINGTON, Nov 15 (Reuters) - Newly-elected U.S. Senate majority leader Harry Reid [...] said in the interview in Wednesday editions of The Washington Post [that] one of the first acts of the new Democratic-led Congress will be a $75 billion boost to the military budget to try to get the Army's diminished units back into combat shape, Reid told the newspaper.

Our country already spends more than the rest of the world COMBINED on "defense", our schools are failing, people get killed in the streets, there's no money for people to have jobs, and the democrats want to INCREASE THE MILITARY BUDGET?

National Missile Defense ("star wars") has an estimated costs of $30 billion over its lifetime. The total cost of the F-22 raptor jet over its lifetime has been over $60 billion.

All of this - while the NJ public schools are facing budget cuts, and people in Newark can't go into homeless shelters because of cuts in welfare payments - and the newly elected democratic majority of the senate wants to RAISE THE MILITARY BUDGET?

FUCK THAT.

The NY Times had an article about math education today. This was my reply.

Editor,

As someone with a degree in mathematics, i know that averages are deceptive - they ignore what happens at the margins. And as a high school math teacher in Newark, NJ, i work precisely at the end of the spectrum that lowers US average math performance - the end where families can't afford expensive private tutoring services.

One way to raise average scores is to identify the cause of poor performance at the bottom, and alleviate or eliminate those factors.

Simply put, one reason why average US scores are so much lower than those of other industrialised countries is that the US has much more poverty than other industrialised countries.

If the new democratic majority wants to improve our students' average math performance, they can start with bringing jobs back to the inner city.

Matteo Tamburini

Spett.le redazione del manifesto:

 Marco d’Eramo scrive, giustamente, che la nuova maggioranza democratica al Parlamento degli Stati Uniti non significa automaticamente che la scelte politiche diventeranno “di sinistra.” E’ ancora compito nostro, come cittadini degli Stati Uniti spingerli verso scelte politiche (in campo sociale e internazionale) piu’ condivisibili.

 Ma credo che, nello scrivere l’articolo, d’Eramo si renda colpevole di eccesso di cinismo. In particolare, d’Eramo descrive Jon Tester semplicemente come uno “contrario alla limitazione delle armi e fieramente ostile all'immigrazione clandestina, fautore di una fortificazione della frontiera.”

 Tester, al contrario della maggioranza schiacciante dei parlamentari statunitensi, e’ un lavoratore: gestisce e lavora in una fattoria a gestione familiare nel Montana, dalla quale non ha mai tratto un reddito molto superiore ai 20mila dollari all’anno; ha perso tre dita da ragazzo in un tritacarne; e’ un campione di politiche economiche che favoriscono le fattorie familiari; si oppone ai sussidi alle multinazionali agricole e alle politiche economiche neoliberiste. Pur essendo “socialmente conservatore”, direi che presentarlo solamente come tale non gli rende giustizia.

 Inoltre, al Senato e’ stato eletto anche Bernie Sanders, un indipendente che si dichiara un socialista, che vince il sostegno anche di Repubblicani perche’ si concentra sulle argomenti come l’assenza di un sistema sanitario nazionale, la perdita di posti di lavoro a causa degli accordi sul “libero commercio”, eccetera.

 Non e’ detto che adesso il governo degli Stati Uniti scelga il ritiro dall’Iraq e scuotano il giogo delle grandi aziende che ne soffoca le scelte politiche. Ma, pur con tutte le cautele del caso, discutiamo anche delle possibilita’ di un cambiamento.

Matteo Tamburini

Newark mayor Cory Booker and some Democratic lawmakers are supporting an ideological darling of the ultra-right: vouchers.

I have been engaged in a discussion about both the general principle, and the specific legislation (NJ Senate Bill 1332). What follows is a patchwork of my opinions on the matter. In the generel case:

• could someone name an example of a situation in which a public service and responsibility has been privatized, and the net outcome has been an improved service for poor people, particularly people of color (i'm thinking about health care, in particular)? i certainly can't think of one...
• i disagree entirely that vouchers can be a part of a constructive solution for all. First on the basis that the people who advocate for vouchers are also the ones whose policies in general are intended to criminalize, marginalize, and disenfranchise poor people. Second, on the basis that "the market" is responsible for the devastation of Newark (through capital and industrial flight), and i refuse to believe that it could also be an instrument for its salvation.

the best case scenario that i can envision is this:

let's say that there is, in Newark, currently, a set of private, "well-performing" schools which have a "qualified staff", and they are suffering from lack of enrollment (let's use as a measure the percentage of students who end up attending 4-year colleges). Let's arbitrarily say that there is room for 1,000 students in these schools.

If corporations such as Prudential gave scholarships to public school students to attend these schools, and thus fill this lack of enrollment (with already existing, proven results at those schools), there would be no objection on my part, or anyone else's, i imagine. There would be a measurable improvement in the quality of education for some of the NPS' students.

The question that i have regards the use of public funds to do so, without what i would consider minimally adequate public oversight.

the senate bill (available HERE) only has the following language:

The regulations shall, at a minimum (okay, this is a minimum: but let's raise the bar a little):

[...]

b. require that a school [...] shall, in the event that more children apply for admission under the pilot program than there are openings at the school, hold a lottery to determine which children are selected for admission, except that preference for enrollment may be given to siblings of students who are enrolled in the school;

c. require that a nonpublic school [...] shall be open to all students who are eligible to participate in the pilot program on a space-available basis and shall not discriminate in its admission policies or practices on the basis of intellectual or athletic ability, measures of achievement or aptitude, status as a handicapped person, proficiency in the English language, or any other basis that would be illegal if used by a public school district; [...] and

d. require any nonpublic school [...] to be in full compliance with all federal, State and local laws applicable to the nonpublic school.

Crucially, the bill says "applicable to nonpublic schools".

Before I will even consider supporting this bill, the language above should be amended to say AT LEAST the following:

-require that the school receiving children etc. should administer the standardized tests administered by grade-level comparable public schools in the same district, with the same validity in regards to graduation requirements.

-require that the information pertaining the results of these standardized tests be made public (and by this i mean having the breakdown by race, family income, etc.)

-require that each year the school receiving children etc. be subjected to an audit investigating all cases of students expelled from the school, and that such data IN THE AGGREGATE be reported publicly in a manner comparable with the public schools in that district.

-require that schools adhere to the New Jersey Core Curriculum Content Standards (i am thinking particularly of science, so you eliminate the risk of kids going to places where they are taught with public money that God created the earth in 6000 BC)

-standards should be established such that, should any school fail to meet them, that school becomes ineligible to receive such funds (for at least a probationary period)

Without these provisions, or other similar ones, this legislation strikes me as a farce. Even WITH such requirements, i would be skeptical of the voucher system, and would urge my reps to vote NO, but at least this way there would be some measures of accountability.

Today there was an editorial in the Star Ledger supporting the senate legislation. I wrote a response, along the lines of what i wrote above:

Regarding NJ State Senate Bill 1332, which would use public tax dollars to provide resources to private schools;

As a public school math teacher, I know first hand the struggles that my students face, and the poor quality of the education that they receive.

But any public school is subject to oversight: all of our students take state-mandated tests, whose results are publicly available. Those results allow the discerning parent (and the tax-paying public) to observe how students of different racial groups and socio-economic status perform, and provide the ground for legitimate criticism. Private schools have no such requirements.

Furthermore, private schools can expel students (the NPS cannot), and do not have to disclose statistics about this practice.

Why should my tax dollars go to schools which do not have to report such information? Would the supporters of S-1332 include language which creates stronger measures of disclosure and accountability for the private schools that receive public money?

Riguardo alle elezioni qua negli stati uniti (che a quanto pare ha stimolato i commenti! meno male, credevo di scrivere le cose per me stesso...):

Ascoltando e leggendo nella sinistra mediatica (e marginale) sento ripetere che, contrariamente a quanto mi immaginavo, a quanto si sente dire nei mass media, e a quanto hanno scritto nel manifesto, in realta' il nuovo schieramento democratico e' progressista - o quantomeno il piu' progressista che ci sia mai stato da oltre un decennio. In particolare, mi sento in dovere di difendere le credenziali progressiste di Jon Tester, il nuovo senatore (democratico) del Montana.

Vorrei segnalare l'elezione al senato di Bernie Sanders del Vermont, un indipendente che si proclama un socialista. Conduce le sue campagne elettorali, vincendo il sostegno anche di elettori repubblicani, parlando sempre con chiarezza di questioni economiche, come la mancanza di un sistema sanitario nazionale, della perdita di posti di lavoro, di costi universitari che aumentano, della pochezza del salario minimo, eccetera. Sanders e' anche un deciso sostenitore della regolamentazione dei media, ed uno strenuo oppositore della concentrazione di potere in poche compagnie.

(quindi, a partire dal 3 gennaio, nel senato degli stati uniti ci sarano: UN nero, UN socialista, e quattordici donne, su cento)

Inoltre, sembra che il primo obbiettivo effettivamente ed immediatamente realizzabile dei neo-eletti democratici sia alzare il salario orario minimo (che adesso e' miseramente $5.15)

Insomma, qualcosa ci danno da sperare - e comunque rimane l'imperativo per noi cittadini di monitorare i nostri rappresentanti.

I attended the State Education Organizing Committee (SEOC) conference

SEOC is an organization that advocates for parent involvement in the context of the NJ Supreme Court ruling in Abbott V. Burke (AVB) & NCLB, made up of local organizations from Newark, Jersey City, and other Abbott districts. They have lobbied and worked on local school issues, district issues, and state issues.

The Newark Group (One Newark Education Committee) meets second Wednesday of every month (except this December), at Essex County College. As a contact person, i was told to call Pat (at La Casa de Don Pedro) 973 485 0701

There was a heavy presence of Education Law Center (ELC) people, who at times seemed to be “directing” the discussion (there were continuous interventions of three white people in what otherwise was overwhelmingly a meeting of women of color) – I ended up with questions about their role.

All panelists I saw were women, with one exception (lady from DOE) women of color.

I attended the first workshop about state funding of AVB mandate. The presenter gave evidence to show that after implementation of AVB, the gap between kids in ‘burbs and kids in Abbott districts who had access to preschool (this only started in 2000, so this applies the most recent classes of fourth graders) is shrinking (which I find convincing) and also evidence to show that high school graduation rates after implementing AVB are improving (I found this less convincing). The presenter also gave information about state legislators, indexed by city. She highlighted the members of relevant NJ legislative committees. She urged us to contact our reps – they are rewriting funding guidelines behind closed doors, and the state budget will soon follow.

She suggested we use the website http://www.givekidsgoodschools.org/nj

The second workshop I attended was given by a lady from the federal DOE who praised vouchers, made questionable racial remarks, and generally did not really say anything or really answer any questions. She did say (and the ELC person confirmed?) that there is data about the Milwaukee voucher program – which I want to look into.

During the final, plenary session there was a discussion of how the assistant State Commissioner of Education (Gordon Macinnes) has said he will NOT implement certain parts of AVB. He has also written a book, which by the title itself seems to scream for an inquiry of how this man came to be in charge of the education of brown and black children all over the state: Wrong for All the Right Reasons: How White Liberals Have Been Undone by Race. There were scattered calls for his resignation, but no final decision was made.

Overall, I was impressed with how knowledgeable, articulate and involved several of the participants were, and I felt kind of ashamed that I did not know more about the state legislature.

And I felt reinforced in my belief that the key to ultimately bringing about sustained and systematic change in education is to empower precisely those who have the least voice – poor students of color and their families – and that the most appropriate role for any potential ally of such efforts from outside the community is to provide resources and support to any such efforts – crucially, with the utmost care to be respectful of local decisions, decision-making processes and leadership.

Newark's Mayor Cory Booker has come out strongly in favor of a voucher program
from the state of New jersey. and he got the city council to vote to support it
as well.

This was the article in the Star Ledger

I wrote a letter to the editor of the Star Ledger about it. i would encourage you to do the same:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am a high school math teacher in Newark, and i can think of many ways in which public schools could use $20 million.

When I offered a few students the opportunity of staying after school for additional extra help, their parents have sometimes told me that they do not want to let their children stay after school because they are (justifiably) concerned for their safety. The state could provide transportation to and from school (and incidentally create jobs).

The band teacher at my school has class sizes of over twenty-five, and yet she is supposed to work individually with each to monitor their progress with their instrument. The state could hire community members with experience in music to work as aides and tutors in her classroom.

There is a constant stream of students enrolling throughout the schoolyear - i had one student enroll in April. The state could create a special program for students who come into the district after the beginning of the schoolyear.

When students are suspended, they essentially get a vacation in which they do not learn their school material. The state could create a program that students have to attend when they are suspended that focuses perhaps on remedial math and reading/writing.

Providing a $20 million tax break to businesses to support private schools is not the best use of public funds.

Matteo Tamburini

Il partito democratico ha "vinto" le elezioni. nel senso che: adesso hanno il controllo della camera dei deputati e (forse) il senato.

Cosa cambiera'? non e' affatto chiaro. Una misura importannte sarebbe vedere come cambiera' la vita quotidiana delle persone di Newark, e dei miei studenti in particolare. In breve: sospetto che non cambiera' nulla. Tutti i vari personaggi eletti dal New Jersey sono rimasti gli stessi di prima, anche a livello locale.

Un'altra misura sarebbe vedere cosa combiera' di sostanziale in Iraq. e qui devo ricordare che, in primo luogo, i democratici controllavano il senato e comunque hanno votato a favore della guerra. E la maggioranza degli statunitensi favorisce un ritiro rapido di tutte le truppe. Quindi potremmo dire che i democratici faranno un bel lavoro se: si faranno promotori aggressivi del ritiro delle truppe dall'Iraq e una fine alla costruzione delle basi militari permanenti.

Quindi ci possiamo aspettare:: che le politiche economiche saranno ridimensionate riducendo un po' i vantaggi degli ultraricchi e favorendo un po' della classe media.

magari ci saranno piccole differenze a qualche altro livello locale.

Ma per il resto rimango dell'idea che il partito e' ancora pieno di falle. e lo rimarra' fin quando la gente non li costringera' e mettersi decisamente a favore di un sistema sanitario nazionale, a favore di un limite alla concentrazione del potere dei media, e facendo una svolta in senso MORALE in politica estera.

in the East Ward of Newark, a community of immigrants and working class people. At the polling place there was only one machine - which might be a problem if there is a rush of people who come to vote after they leave work today. aside from the poll workers, there seemed to be no-one else: no monitors, but also no-one challenging people for IDs. granted, i would imagine that this district is predominantly democratic, so such tacticts might be saved for places where the vote is more of a toss-up. I voted on a machine without a touch-screen. the machine did not produce a paper receipt, but i did not ask for one either.

Now i'm off to volunteer for Acorn.

The previous city administration committed $210 million to building an ice hockey arena in Newark. A slap in the face of the residents, who need lots of other things. So now the Cory Booker administration has to deal with this, and they recently renegotiated the terms.

From the November 3^rd LusoAmericano:

The previous agreement did not require the Devils to invest any money until the city had expanded its $210 million contribution. Additionally, the city has acquired a large development lot at Broad and Mulberry Streets valued between $3 and $5 million.

The Devils have also agreed to provide $250,000 annually to support Labor Apprentice and Minority Business Development Programs in Newark. In addition, the Devils will provide $250,000 annually to support arena recreation center and programming and sports programming for Newark Youth. These include at least 4,500 free hockey tickets for Newark children. The previous agreement did not specifically allot a definite number of tickets or dedicate funds to support minority business development and labor apprenticeship programs.

The city of Newark and the Devils also agreed to partner in a continued effort to hire Newark residents and minority vendors, making the arena the only sports venue in the area committed to engaging minority vendors.

Another new term calls for the Devils to provide an annual minimum of $125,000 to support the maintenance of current city parks and recreation centers and to build new ones in every ward in the city.

"The success of this project is bigger than the arena," Mayor Booker said. "My administration is committed to pushing for ancillary development in the Downtown Core. This development is pivotal to the success of the arena and the economic growth of downtown Newark. The 16 acres that make up the arena are a critical element of the downtown core and when combined with the broader development plans, will generate prosperity for Newarkers."

To achieve that, Mayor Booker said, the 40 acres of the Downtown Core must be developed. The mayor said that the administration would now work to encourage the developers who own the 24 remaining acres of the area to turn this land into commercial and residential properties, instead of blacktop parking. The City also will work to secure state and federal monies to create parks in the area, a new "Front Door" for Penn Station and define a higher use for the space now occupied by the Continental Arena in the Meadowlands.

So far so good. But there is more news, not all of it good, in the Star Ledger:

The city also will be able to use the giant video screen outside the arena and other advertising venues around the site to promote itself.

Developers Jerome Gottesman and Jose Lopez swapped pieces of land on which the facility is being built for land surrounding the arena that will be used to develop a hotel, parking and residential space. One of those parcels is property the housing authority purchased with $4.1 million in federal funding that was to be used to house the poor.

That purchase was the focus of a federal audit by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that said the authority should not have spent the money. Now, HUD and the authority are demanding payment.

Until the authority is paid, all the land swaps are on hold, meaning all development around the arena is also on hold. Economic development experts have said the promise to develop the 24-acre zone around the arena was the main reason to invest city funds in the project.

The road improvements and other projects will cost the city tens of millions of dollars above the $210 million in taxpayer money the administration of former Mayor Sharpe James committed to the project, Kemp said.

So it seems like the city is pouring MORE money into the project (even with all the contributions, the Devils would end up repaying 10 extra million in 16 years), and taking out land that was destined for low income housing.

On the eve of the midterm elections, here is Bush's "November surprise": Saddam Hussein's face on the front page of every newspaper in the country, under the heading "sentenced to death." Take that, mr. and mrs. USA: the team in charge of this country has brought to you the death by trial of the closest thing to hitler.

There should be other prosecutions, and, if we followed the nuremberg rules, other hangings.