“Freindly Fire Zone”

Part Two

If the Church had fought for true school choice, many schools would be thriving

What does it tell you when private Notre Dame Academy in Villanova has 101 students in its freshman class --- at $20,000 per year --- and Archbishop Prendergast in Drexel Hill, an Archdiocesan high school, has…82?  Yes --- eighty two.

That the economy is booming because folks can shell out 20K a pop? That the gap between rich and poor is widening, with more people in the “have” category?  Not quite.

It tells us, in no uncertain terms, two things:

1) Over the last several decades, too many leaders in the Catholic Church have strayed from their Godly mission, trying to be all things to all people, destroying the Catholic identity, and, worst of all, covering-up the child sex scandal and protecting pedophile priests (See January 11 column).  The result has been, and continues to be, apathy for most, anger for many, and an exodus from the Church for thousands of others.  The Church has reaped what it has sown, and nowhere is that more evident that the 30 percent decrease in Catholic school enrollment in Archdiocesan schools.

2) The Catholic Church, for all its money, muscle and might, has been a political paper tiger in fighting for its beliefs, most notably school choice. For the last 15 years, it either didn’t do its job to ensure passage of legislation that would provide a voucher to parents (their own tax money) to send their children to the school of their choice, or it backed meaningless and ineffective bills.  Either way, if the Church had done its job effectively without cowering at the sight of its own shadow, only a handful of the 49 schools that closed recently and the scores --- that everyone seems to be forgetting --- that have been shuttered over the last decade, would be out of business.  In fact, most would be thriving.

The Prendie situation tells it all.  While officially having “open enrollment” where physical or Church boundaries are not criteria for admission, Prendie still traditionally draws from Catholic “feeder schools,” as does its brother school, Monsignor Bonner (119 in its freshman class).  Do the math. If we conservatively estimate that there are 22 elementary schools serving those high schools, that’s fewer than 4 girls per school going to Prendie, and just 6 attending Bonner.  No wonder they closed!

(Though a strong case can be made to consolidate the two schools, many believe the Archdiocese will not do so because a nearby hospital may be eyeing the land. With potentially millions more in abuse settlements, the Church may need the proceeds of that sale to pay those large amounts --- just as the Boston Archdiocese sold 99 acres of prime real estate to Boston College to pay settlements.  Closing schools to pay sex scandal settlements just infuriates Catholics that much more, leading to a vicious circle of yanking students from Catholic schools altogether).

And why are the elementary schools not sending more students?  Two reasons.  Many parents are choosing public schools because they don’t feel the value of Catholic high school is justified by a $6,000 price tag.  And of course, there aren’t many students left in Catholic elementary schools in the first place.  Take Annunciation BVM in Irish Catholic Havertown. It is slated to close, allegedly because there aren’t enough students in attendance (though they hit the attendance number the Diocese mandated and are one of a handful of schools with a parish surplus). But a drive through the town will instinctively tell you what any demographic statistician already knows: the Catholic population is more than healthy enough to see Annunciation at 80 percent capacity --- or even more.

The proof? In 1911, there were 68,000 students in Archdiocesan schools, out of 525,000 Catholics (in a diocese, by the way, that was considerably larger in size than the one today).  A century later, we are back at the same level of 68,000 (down from a peak of 250,000 in the 1960’s), yet the smaller-sized Archdiocese now has almost 1.5 million Catholics. Those numbers clearly show that, for most areas (inner city Philadelphia being an exception), the Catholic population is absolutely large enough to support most of the schools that closed.

Taking out of the equation those parents who are angry or disenfranchised with the Church (and its schools), there still remains a substantial number of families that would love nothing better than to enroll their children, but simply cannot afford to do so.

Unfortunately, those people get walloped with a triple wammy. They slog through life paying some of the highest tax rates in the entire world, funding wholly ineffective governments at all levels while getting relatively little value in return. They live in one of the few countries in the Western world that does not assist parents with nonpublic school education.  And they are scared to death about receiving a pink slip in an economy that is tanking further by the day, with many banking what they earn rather than paying for the desired education for their children.

Enter school choice in Pennsylvania. Or lack thereof.

In 1995, a statewide, comprehensive school choice bill failed by a single vote. And while the Church played an active role in that fight, it refused to do the things necessary that would have pushed the legislation across the finish line. Priests should have been preaching from the pulpit, educating parishioners on the merits of school choice and rallying the troops to contact their legislators (which can clearly be done without jeopardizing their nonprofit status). But overall, they didn’t.

They could have placed pro-school choice cards addressed to representatives and senators in each pew, to be filled out during Mass and collected before exiting church. But they didn’t.

And they could have tied all of it together by playing hardball with wishy-washy politicians, informing them in no uncertain terms that school choice would be the one and only issue that many Catholics would be voting on --- and Catholics vote --- in the next election.  But they didn’t.

Instead, too many left the battle to the “insiders,” and guess what? Choice failed, and schools closed.  A lot of them, most of which would be open today had school choice passed.
 
Fast forward to 2011. What did the Church do?  Support the weakest, most meaningless education reform bill that would have neither helped educate nor reform anything (Senate Bill 1).  It was so restrictive that it would not have affected one middle class family, but the final version (which bombed) seemed to cater only to those Capricorns in the inner city who promised to wear plaid pants on Tuesdays.

The Catholic Conference’s rationale for supporting such a bad bill? Incrementalism was the only way to go, and, after all, that was the only bill out there. Talk about a losing mentality. Maybe if the Catholic leaders in their ivory towers had the foresight to see what was coming down the pike with school closings, they would have made a broad-based bill a reality and went full-bore to accomplish passage. And since the 1995 bill was run with a somewhat hostile legislature and still almost passed, it should have been a no-brainer to aggressively push for a bill this time that would also help the middle class, since the Governor and legislature were infinitely more amenable to such a bill.

But they didn’t.

And they didn’t even push for an expansion of the educational improvement tax credit (EITC) after school choice failed, which, while not a panacea, would certainly help.

Senate Bill 1, even had it passed, would not have saved one Catholic school. But that was simply an alien concept to the Church’s political braintrust, and the results speak for themselves.

As a result, all people suffer the financial consequences. Of the over 24,000 students displaced, a significant number will now attend public school.  And since it costs over $15,000 per student, per year to educate a public school student, property taxes are about to go through the roof, which could not come at a worse time.  Not only will more textbooks and buses have to be purchased, but more teachers, more modular classrooms, and, quite soon, more capital projects to accommodate the influx of Catholic school students.

Some claim that school choice is a bailout of the Catholic schools.  Wrong. Since the money is directed to the parent, not the school, it clearly isn’t.  But it will be interesting to see the reaction from critics of school choice (and Catholicism in general) when they can no longer afford to pay their property taxes. As the saying goes, what goes around comes around.

Where do we go from here?

There is a passage from a book written in the 1987 book, God’s Children, that best sums up why Catholic education must be saved:

“The Catholic Church must forget its inferiority complex. No other religion is reluctant to ask for what it wants. If we don’t ask, if we don’t stand up and fight for what we believe in, we can’t expect to win. Life is a street fight. We can roll up our sleeves and jump in, not certain whether we’ll win or lose, or walk away, allowing a huge part of our heritage to disappear….

If we fail, what do we tell the ghosts? The nuns and priests who for two centuries devoted their lives to the cause? The men and women, like our parents, who broke their backs to support their families yet somehow found a way to support our schools? Do we tell them that it’s over, that their legacy has disappeared forever? That we couldn’t hold on to what they gave us?”

And most haunting:

“I don’t want to tell my children and grandchildren that I was around when time ran out on Catholic education.”

Is it that time?  Put it this way.  Anyone who believes that the closings are done is simply deluding himself, for shutting down schools is a band-aid solution to a gaping wound that will continue to hemorrage.
 
That is, unless the Archdiocese of Philadelphia somehow finds a leader with the courage of his convictions, someone willing to “roll up his sleeves” and fight for what is right.

Archbishop Chaput, your 15 minutes are upon you, and the floor is yours. Godspeed!

Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television/radio commentator, and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com  His self-syndicated model has earned him the largest cumulative media voice in Pennsylvania. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Vatican II Destroyed Catholic Identity And The Essence Of Being Catholic

The message from Headquarters was sent to field agents worldwide:

“This is your mission --- if you choose to accept it:  Take one of the most powerful institutions in the history of mankind and change it so radically --- in all the wrong ways --- that in the span of fifty years, it will be a shell of its former self, relegated to a backwater shaped only by the sad ghosts of the past.”

Was this a Mission Impossible communiqué sent at the height of the Cold War to implode the Soviet Union? Certainly could have been. And the goal would have been a worthy one, fighting an evil adversary hell-bent on human domination.

Interestingly --- tragically, actually --- that message could also apply perfectly to another mammoth entity --- the Roman Catholic Church. 

There is one critical difference. The Soviets fell from outside forces, namely the influence of the United States.  But the Church, while admittedly having its fair share of outside “attackers,” is falling from within, and most of its decline is entirely of its own making.

The above message could well have come from St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican, 1965.  The “field agents?”   Cardinals, bishops and priests.  The objective: implement Vatican II.

And implement it they did.

The result? Disaster.

In the tumultuous 1960’s, the world was on fire as secularism and moral relativism were in vogue. Rather than standing its ground and fighting those undesirable concepts, the Church went in the opposite direction.  In effect, Vatican II allowed Catholics to be “Catholic” in pretty much any way they wanted, playing right into the hands of the Woodstock culture. Unwittingly, that carte-blanche decree served as a launching point for the now-dominant “do whatever you want to do and whatever makes you feel good without remorse” mentality.

In an instant, the things that made Roman Catholicism the world’s dominant force vanished.  To many, the “rock” upon which St. Peter built the Church no longer seemed solid, but more “flexible.” So rather than building upon the mighty history of the Church, expanding its reach while adapting to the times with a measure of common sense, the hierarchy went in the other direction.

Some Church officials, to be sure, disagreed with the Church’s new vision, but they were powerless to stop it, and for good reason.  Not only were they forced to follow orders, but in a much more practical sense, they were no longer able to hold their flock accountable when the Church itself abandoned many of the tenets which made it so attractive in the first place.

Give people an inch, and they take a yard.  And unequivocally, that isn’t limited to religion, but all organized entities.

When a political party strives to become a very large “tent,” trying to be all things to all people rather than affirming its platform --- what it stands for --- it eventually becomes impotent. It’s one thing for a position to evolve as circumstances change, so long as the basic belief structure isn’t irreparably compromised as to make the original tenet unrecognizable.  When that occurs --- and both Parties are guilty of it --- the result is the most unintended of consequences: no one is pleased, and people abandon the organization in ever-growing numbers, both officially and through apathy, indifference and inaction.

Has a football team ever won a Championship when the coach tells his players to practice in whatever way that makes them feel good about themselves --- if they want to practice at all? Has a team ever been successful after making mandatory team meetings optional?  And how long will a team stay a cohesive unit if players simply ignore the coach’s play-calling and do their own thing?

Morale and pride mean everything in building a successful team or institution, but they can only exist when sacrifice and dedication is demanded of the individuals who make up that entity. The only part of JFK’s inaugural address that people remember was when he demanded greatness of Americans by asking “what you can do for your country.”

The Church lost those things when it stopped demanding greatness from its rank and file, instead letting folks off the hook by making things “easier.” It thought that by doing so, it would be the recipient of goodwill from the flock and see its membership increase.

It thought wrong.

Holy Day of Obligation falls on a Saturday or Monday?  You don’t have to go to Church that day, since we’ll just make Sunday mass count for both.

Too hard to fast from midnight to receive Communion? That’s way too long! Make it an hour.

You want to wear cut-off shorts, sports jerseys and flip-flops to Church? If it makes you feel good, then no problem.

Fasting from meat on Friday get in the way of ordering sausage on your pizza? The hell with it. Just do it. We’ll eliminate that rule too.

The list goes on and on, and the more the Church gave in to such expediency, the more people stopped going to Mass, and yes, the more parents stopped sending their children to Catholic schools.  Since the Church took away the essence of Catholic identity --- the very point of being a proud Roman Catholic --- then what was the point of doing either?

And now, several generations later, the carnage is everywhere.

The mosques are full, as are many evangelical churches, yet the churches are empty.

And in those evangelical churches, a significant percentage of the congregation is former Catholics who left the Church not because it was too “hard,” but because it stopped demanding.

Vocations are nonexistent, elderly out-of-touch priests have no replacements, schools are being shuttered at a staggering rate (which goes way beyond this latest round of closings), and scandal and corruption are rampant with no end in sight, as criminal trials and more billion dollar settlements loom.

And worst of all, the cover-ups continue, serving for many as the final nail in the coffin.  Why go to Church to listen to a long-winded uninsprational sermon about “morality” when Church leaders actively stonewall investigations and protect society’s absolute worst --- child predators?

So what does the Church do?

Despite all that baggage, the Church has fast-tracked Pope John Paul II to sainthood faster than anyone else in history --- a man who either was asleep at the switch during the height of the sandal, or chose to look the other way.  He could have aggressively rooted out the perpetrators with a take-no-prisoners attitude, sending an unmistakable message that the Church does not solicit nor will ever tolerate pedophiles to fill its ranks, regardless of the dearth of priests. But he didn’t.

And now, it has rolled out language changes in the liturgy which are ridiculous and inexplicable. Was it just another example of how out-of-touch the Church has become, or a deliberate distraction, as some theorize?

Either way, it doesn’t matter.

Until the Church implements real reforms that will start the road to recovery, the numbers will continue to dwindle.

What are they?

-For starters, demand more of its followers. Don’t cower behind the “if I demand that people dress better for Church, they won’t come at all” mentality. Make them look presentable and act appropriately when entering the House of God --- or tell them they aren’t welcome. The Church would be shocked to see how many MORE people will start attending Church again, and acting more reverently when they are there --- just like public school children have more pride when required to wear uniforms.

-Motivate the flock by relating to them, not talking in platitudes with rhetoric that puts the congregation to sleep.

-Make it tougher to be a Catholic --- to once again be the religious equivalent of the Marines. Sure, a kid taking the forbidden cookie wants it, but deep down, he is really looking for discipline. And sure, we complain when we have to sacrifice, but we feel good about it.

-Market the wonderful aspects of the Church, including it being the largest provider of social services in the entire world.

-Stop being a paper tiger politically. What’s the point of having so much muscle if you’re too scared to use it? If it had, most of the schools would not have closed (discussed in tomorrow’s Part Two).

And most important, eliminate the correct perception that the Church is close-minded and sexist. Allow priests to marry --- and yes, allow women to become priests.  Not only would these common sense changes enable all priest to better relate to their flocks, but they would also attract non-pedophile priests to fill the ranks, allowing those who want to pursue a life of service to not be viewed suspiciously--- by virtually everyone.

And neither would violate Church dogma, since priests married for at least four centuries, and quite possibly much longer. The practice was stopped not for religious reasons, but for disputes over property rights.  And since God was kind enough to bestow upon us annuities, life insurance and other neat financial tools in the last century, it’s time to drop the charade and bring the Church into modern times.

                                                                             *****

The Second Vatican Council set in motion series of changes that, if they didn’t completely shatter much of what was beloved about the Church, certainly called into question Catholic identity. And nowhere are the tragic results more apparent than the dwindling number of Catholic schools. As schools go by the wayside, so does the Church’s future generations. 

In 1911, there were 68,000 Catholic school students in the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. That number peaked in the 1960’s at 250,000. After Vatican II took hold, the number plummeted back to 68,000 in 2011 --- despite the U.S. population exploding from 92,000,000 a century ago to 308,000,000.

And now, 49 more schools just went on the chopping block. The biggest irony is that the closings are not a solution, but the symptom of a much greater illness.  To save the remaining schools --- and that’s by no means a sure thing --- the Church needs to solve the problem…

Part II will discuss how to save Catholic education in America.

  
Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television/radio commentator, and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com  His self-syndicated model has earned him the largest cumulative media voice in Pennsylvania. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

The televised images of violence and looting triggered one recurring thought in many people--- that this isn’t supposed to happen in our civilized cities.

No, we’re not just talking about London, but right here in Philadelphia, as flash mobs have grown more frequent --- and more violent.

To deal with mobs --- which keep residents barricaded in their homes and visitors out of the city --- Mayor Michael Nutter has instituted a citywide curfew.  Areas around Center City have been targeted with an extra police presence. 

Common sense tells us there will be a drop in flash mobs with the curfew, although violent incidents have still been occurring just outside the targeted zones.

In and of itself, the curfew isn’t a bad idea, but that seems to be the Mayor’s only answer, and that’s the real problem.

It should be obvious that a curfew can’t solve the underlying reasons as to why the uprisings are taking place.  But given the fact that flash mobs have been plaguing the city since early 2010, the Mayor has shown himself to be unable or unwilling to address the root causes.

So the problem only worsens.

                                                                         *****

Curfews Aren’t A Panacea

Curfews are short term, reactive tools of government, a tactic rather than a strategy.  While people feel safer --- which is important to keep society functioning --- the false sense of security that a curfew provides often evaporates when the situation doesn’t stabilize or the curfew is lifted.

They are simply too expensive and resource-intensive to be permanently maintained. Police become bogged down in the menial work of processing curfew violators and contacting their parents (who will be hit with fines they can’t afford), instead of focusing on the real criminals prowling the city.

And that is simply not the most effective use of our crime-fighting resources.

The other downside is that curfews create resentment among those affected --- most of whom are law abiding citizens --- because an entire group now becomes classified as criminals for doing something that two weeks ago was perfectly legal.  The majority are punished for the actions of very few.

Measures which are perceived to unfairly target people based on age, skin color and gender will only enflame tensions, not soothe them. And as a result, people take on the persona of that which they are accused of being.

Curfew aside, perhaps the focus should be on targeting actual crime, and concentrate on arresting actual criminals, (not curfew violators).  If the police catch the bad guys, the prosecutors gain convictions, and judges hand down tough sentences, we’d be light years ahead of where we are today.

Here’s the bottom line: you don’t solve a crime problem by making something a crime that is now not a crime.

So why do we do these things? Because they’re easy and make good 30-second sound bites.  While the Mayor wants us to believe that the curfew will make everything right, in reality we are left with a city that is no safer in the long run.

Beyond the curfew, what does the Mayor suggest to solve the problem? That parents and children need to “get their act together” and that there will be a “zero tolerance” for this type of behavior.

Some parents absolutely need to get to get their act together, but for many, they are doing all the right things yet are still swimming against the tide. Things that would improve their situation are out of their control, and the person who could fix the problems --- the Mayor --- chooses not to.

Too bad Michael Nutter doesn’t employ a zero-tolerance policy where it’s needed most: educational failure and businesses fleeing the city.

Solve the Problem

Sure, there is an element in every society that is violent and lawless, and nothing can ever change that. The only solution for those thugs is a life in prison.

But for the majority of others, crime doesn’t have to be a way of life, but often is because of the lack of opportunities, both educationally and professionally. That’s where bold leadership comes into play, the ability to reverse years of decline with real solutions to the toughest problems.
Unfortunately, this Mayor is totally lacking in that category.

As Freindly Fire has repeatedly noted, the core reason for our situation is the horrendously bad educational system, which directly results in the lack of hope for young people.

There is simply no possibility of receiving a quality education in Philadelphia, despite taxpayers spending more than $17,000 per student, per year.  Some schools are deathtraps and, incomprehensibly, many sport graduation rates in the 20’s and 30’s --- and that’s after a huge number have already dropped out. Despite all the rhetoric promising to turn things around, they have only gotten worse.

When the most basic life skills are lacking, the prospects for a decent job are virtually nonexistent, so many of our youth see the dream of a stable and prosperous life as nothing more than an illusion. Faith is lost.

If young people feel they have nothing to live for, they resort to criminal activity. The youths committing these crimes figure that, before they are thirty, they’ll either be dead or in jail. The “I’ve got nothing to lose” attitude turns them into predators, and law-abiding citizens become their prey.

When education is trumped by survival, everybody loses. But no one wants to fix the problem, instead pretending that more money is the solution. Wrong --- it isn’t.  Only educational competition --- school choice ---can turn things around. But it isn’t happening, so another generation will be lost while gutless politicians continue their inane babble which accomplishes nothing.

And speaking of competition, is it any wonder why Philadelphia can’t compete with the nation’s cities that are growing? Could it have something to do with the fact that, cumulatively, it’s the highest taxed city in the country? And that the situation is only worsening?

Under the Mayor’s watch, property taxes have gone through the roof, the city portion of the sales tax has increased 100 percent, pension payments have been deferred, and numerous other taxes and fees have been instituted or proposed. And that’s in addition to what was already a crushing tax load.

It’s a simple cause and effect.  Businesses flee the city or refuse to relocate here. The resulting lack of opportunities in turn triggers despair and increased crime.

As the recently released Pew survey showed, residents who can depart Philadelphia do, leaving behind an underclass with scant opportunities and even less hope.

You wouldn’t treat a heart attack victim by giving him an aspirin, since that would only be treating a symptom. In Philadelphia, curfews and feel-good fairy tale rhetoric have become the “cure” but do nothing other than speed up the city’s deathspiral.

                                                                       *****
Until leaders with a true understanding of the problems --- and how to solve them --- take control, citizens will continue to be held hostage to terrorizing thugs, and brazen crime sprees will increase.

Whether its flash mobs, riots, brutal subway attacks, or cops in the crosshairs, it’s clear that respect for authority is waning, and no one is off-limits to the predators.

Create opportunity, and you create stability.  People with good jobs buy houses, have families and become productive, law abiding citizens with an incentive to keep their neighborhoods safe.

Ignore the problems, and you have a powder keg ready to explode. With nothing to lose, all bets are off --- and society takes a hit.
Anything less than real solutions will make flash mobs more than just a flash in the pan, but an unfortunate part of everyday city life. 

An accredited member of the media, Chris Friend is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries
and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including
The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick
Morris' recent bestseller "Catastrophe."

Freind, whose column appears regularly in Philadelphia Magazine and nationally in
Newsmax, also serves as a frequent guest commentator on talk radio and state/national
television, most notably on FOX Philadelphia.  He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

The Great School Choice Debate, hosted by The Independence Hall Tea Party Association on March 6, was a passionate discussion of Senate Bill 1, the school choice bill currently in the state senate. At issue was whether SB 1, a limited scope bill granting a voucher to low-income families (in which the state subsidy would follow the child, not the school) is the only legislation achievable at this time, or whether a broader, more comprehensive bill can be passed.

Unfortunately, it wasn’t the healthy debate that it should have been because Senator Anthony Williams, one of the bill’s prime sponsors and a confirmed panelist, arrived well after the event had ended.  It seems he was misinformed of the time, despite everyone else getting it right. 

Although mistakes happen, it is curious that this is the second time in one month that the senator committed to a school choice discussion, and failed to show.  Some may chalk that up to bad staffing, but others who have been around politics don’t believe in such coincidence.

Regardless, the discussion was lively, civil and productive, with all the participants in agreement that school choice was crucial, the only measure that would bring competition and accountability to our failed school system. The panelists were:

-Reverend Joe Watkins, former Lt. Gov. candidate, MSNBC commentator and Executive Director of the Students First organization;

-Dom Giordano, talk-show host extraordinaire on 1210 WPHT, the region’s largest talk-radio station.  Giordano was slated to be the moderator, but sat with Watkins so the discussion wouldn’t be lopsided.

-State Representative Curt Schroder, a proponent of statewide school choice. Schroder was a House member in the mid-90’s when a comprehensive school choice bill barely missed passage;

-Yours truly, author of numerous columns and participant in several television segments advocating school choice, including why SB 1 is flawed legislation that will most likely fail if it is not amended in the House to expand choice.  I was also Executive Director of the REACH Alliance, the preeminent statewide school choice organization, during the school choice battles in the 90’s.

Questions were offered by Teri Adams, President of the Independence Hall Tea Party, Sharon Cherubin, Executive Director of UNITE PA, a grassroots organization based in Lancaster County, and the audience.

                                                                         *****

Before the Pennsylvania dialogue began, New Jersey state senator Michael Doherty discussed his state’s efforts to pass education reform.  Doherty explained that, while more expansive tax credit programs and school choice would be ideal, they simply weren’t possible given the sizable Democratic majorities in that state’s House and Senate. He said that they had to settle for what was politically possible.

And that’s exactly why the defeatist attitude of some SB 1 proponents is so incomprehensible.  To say that a bill limited only to low-income families is the best we can hope for is simply inaccurate. 

Which is why something doesn’t pass the sniff test. 

Rational political observers have stated that, if they didn’t know better, it would seem, for some reason, there has been undue influence to kill any effort to expand the bill.

Either that, or legislators don’t want to do the work necessary to come up with better legislation.

I had the opportunity to speak with Senator Williams after the non-debate, and while I came away with some good news, I also left with a lot more skepticism.

Williams claimed that the legislation for comprehensive, statewide school choice failed in 1995 by a single vote, a point on which I wholeheartedly agree.

I then asked him if he would support a more expanded version of school choice than is currently offered in SB 1, and he stated that he would (great news), but that “it would not pass,” (a perplexing statement).

And therein lies the problem.  There is absolutely nothing on which that assumption can be made, and, in fact, the opposite is undisputedly true.

Let’s forget our biases for or against school choice, and focus just on the political realities between 1995 and now.

Despite the Republican wave of 1994, the State House remained Democratic by one vote. It took a party switch to give control to the GOP --- and the ability to push school choice in that chamber.

In the time span since, the legislature has experienced a turnover of at least 70 percent.

Fast forward to the wave of 2010, when thirteen seats flipped and the GOP gained a ten seat majority.  And not only are there more conservative legislators, but the public is much more accepting of school choice.

As an added benefit, Williams will most likely bring several more Democratic legislators with him who were previously “No” votes.

So let’s follow this logic.  Fact: the statewide school choice bill fell one vote short in 1995, when the House had a one seat Republican majority.  Fact: the House now has a 10 vote GOP majority.  Fact:  the electorate is much more understanding of the need for this legislation.  Fact: the Republican Governor has stated his support for statewide school choice.  Fact: Williams brings additional Democratic votes.

Given these facts, the passage of comprehensive school choice legislation should be a slam dunk.

Instead, with no actual vote count having been taken, the white towel has been thrown in before the fight has begun.

The “we can only get school choice incrementally” argument is based on a number of false assumptions, such as the House and Governorship remaining in Republican hands over the next several cycles, the legislature actually agreeing to take up such a controversial issue year after year while facing the wrath of well-funded teachers unions, and that a limited program will produce noticeable improvements. And if a limited program is judged to be only a marginal improvement, the entire program could be jeopardized, nullifying the one-slice-at-a-time argument.

Here’s the bottom line: the forces standing in the way of progress by deliberately ignoring all the political signs need to stop being part of the problem. 

Pennsylvania cannot improve its economic position by graduating functional illiterates, which is exactly what we are doing.  Half of the state’s 11th graders cannot read or write proficiently.

It’s time, once and for all, to take our heads out of the sand and do the right thing for our children --- all of them. Failure to do so will simply waste another decade and forsake our future.

And what a terrible “choice” that would be.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative
reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries
and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including
The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick
Morris' recent bestseller "Catastrophe."

Freind, whose column appears regularly in Philadelphia Magazine and nationally in
Newsmax, also serves as a frequent guest commentator on talk radio and state/national
television, most notably on FOX Philadelphia.  He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Author’s Note:

The Archdiocese of Philadelphia just announced that it will be closing seven more schools, a trend that has been occurring for decades. Despite some disingenuous critics who label any choice program as a “bailout of the Catholic Schools,” it is no secret that non-public schools would significantly benefit from comprehensive school choice legislation. And the more non-public schools there are, the more competition there is.

These school closings --- four of which are in Philadelphia ---reinforce Freindly Fire’s earlier-stated position that Senate Bill 1’s effectiveness will be extremely limited, not just because it caters only to low income families, but for the simple reason that fewer and fewer schools remain as alternatives to the current monopolistic system.

And to repudiate yet another fallacious argument that school choice costs taxpayer money (when in fact it would save it), consider the following:

The seven schools had a cumulative projected enrollment of 857 students next year.  Based on dwindling number of non-public schools, assume that half will attend public schools.  At an average cost of $15,000 per student, per year to educate one student in the public schools, these 428 students will cost taxpayers an additional $6,427,500 per year.  If each student has, on average, six years of grade school remaining, the cost rises to over $38 million. 

And of course, that figure does not reflect inflation, nor the huge costs of hiring more teachers, funding additional pensions, building more classrooms, buying more textbooks, and increasing busing. 

Pennsylvania can’t afford NOT to enact school choice.

The school choice bill in the Pennsylvania Senate is significantly flawed legislation which should never have been introduced.  Rather than craft a new bill to reflect the positions of the current legislature and Governor --- both far more receptive to comprehensive school choice than their predecessors --- the prime sponsors didn’t do their homework and jumped the gun by dusting off outdated legislation.  As a direct result, Senate Bill 1 (SB 1) is effectively dead-on-arrival.

Since SB 1 was introduced a mere week after the new legislature was sworn in, no preliminary vote count was conducted during those seven days.  Therefore, statements that SB 1 is “the best we can hope for at this time” and “school choice can be expanded incrementally in the coming years” are fallacies based on the musings of out-of-touch ivory-tower proponents naively setting the bar artificially low.  Incomprehensibly, they are throwing in the towel before the fight has even begun.

Here are the facts why statewide school choice is needed, and suggestions on how to accomplish that goal:

1) Pennsylvania students are 42nd in SAT scores, and rank low in literacy, graduation rates and those going to college.  Their performance on the National Assessment of Education Progress exam has not improved.  And most startling, nearly HALF of all 11th graders are not proficient in math and reading.  This cannot be attributed to just the poor-performing urban schools pulling down scores, but is testament to an across-the-board educational failure. 

Advocating school choice for only low-income students results in the default perception that education is adequate everywhere else, which, based on the results of PSSA standardized test scores, is not remotely accurate. We cannot afford to waste another decade, forsaking our children --- our future --- because some choose to ignore the widespread failure occurring on a daily basis.

2) Pennsylvania spends $26 billion per year on education --- more per student than 39 other states --- an amount which has doubled since 1996.  Despite a drop of 27,000 students over the last ten years, the public school system had added 33,000 employees in that time. Therefore, by definition, increased funding, more personnel and decreased class size has not improved student achievement.

3) Teachers’ salaries and benefits rank among the highest in the nation, yet Pennsylvania leads the nation every year in school strikes --- more than all other states combined. 

4) The components in SB 1were derived during a prior legislative session with a Democratic House and an anti-school choice governor (Rendell).   But the current legislature has thirteen more House Republicans than last session, giving the GOP a ten-seat majority.  While education should never be partisan, it is no secret that Republicans are much more favorable to choice than Democrats.  And Governor Corbett made school choice a cornerstone of his campaign. Combined with the pro-school choice positions of several Democrats, including Senator Anthony Williams, passage of comprehensive choice is eminently obtainable.  (And if Williams and his colleagues won’t support statewide school choice, but only a program only for low-income families, their motivations will be questioned and their credibility severely undermined).

5) With a legislature approximately 80 percent different (and one clearly less open to choice), no votes from the Black Caucus, and only a one-seat House Republican majority, the statewide school choice effort in 1995 failed by a mere three votes. Given the night-and-day differences between then and now, it is indisputable that political will from Governor Corbett and legislative leaders could, should and would result in the nation’s most comprehensive and inclusive school choice program, one which will save taxpayer money.

6) The argument that school choice will take money away from the public schools is not just wrong, but irrelevant.  The only thing we should EVER be concerned with is the children. Schools don’t get jobs and lead nations; people do.  The funding should follow the child, not the system --- a brilliant aspect of SB 1, where parents designate the school to which the state subsidy will be applied.

Following are the steps necessary to ensure that meaningful school choice is passed in Pennsylvania:

A) SB 1 must be re-written and introduced as a new bill, or a separate bill needs to be introduced in the House.  Grassroots organizations cannot support flawed legislation with the hope or “promise” that it will be amended at a future date.

B) The bill must make school choice available to all students, regardless of family income.  This type of comprehensive program is the only way to bring accountability and competition to all schools, public and non-public alike. Our dire situation demands no less.

C) The provision for public schools to “opt out,” as is permitted in SB 1, must be stricken.  Opting out will result in the public school establishment’s “Good Old Boys” network to kick in, guaranteeing that the vast majority of schools won’t participate.  If that occurs, school choice is meaningless.

D) The bill should contain strengthened language that no additional regulations may be imposed on non-public schools.  Current government requirements are adequate and unobtrusive, such as core curriculum and length of school year.  Vouchers or subsidies do not lead to additional regulation, as the highly successful post World War II GI Bill attests, but eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, so such language will alleviate this issue.

E) While government should not impose tuition mandates on non-public schools, the possibility of inflated tuition costs at these schools is an area of concern. Language can be written that limits the subsidy (which cannot exceed tuition cost) to a maximum two percent increase per year, based on the tuition charged in the first year that school choice is enacted. This common sense solution would keep tuition inflation in check while keeping government out of private school decision-making.

F) Expanding the Educational Improvement Tax Credit is a positive step, as the program has seen positive results.  But to be clear, the EITC is not school choice since parents do not control their tax dollars; the scholarships, which average $1000, are doled out by organizations and schools.  Parental control is significantly limited, unlike a true statewide school choice program.

Like any controversial issue, the school choice debate lends itself to misinformation, half-truths and personal attacks.  Pennsylvanians should not be hypnotized by the complexities of education reform, but rather focus on what is indisputable: our government-run public school system is a monopoly with no incentive to change, and only competition can begin to reverse decades of educational failure.

Comprehensive school choice provides that free-market solution, and, when passed, will be a model for the nation.  Failure to do so will destroy another generation’s chances for success.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative
reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com

Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries
and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including
The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick
Morris' recent bestseller "Catastrophe."

Freind, whose column appears regularly in Philadelphia Magazine and nationally in
Newsmax, also serves as a frequent guest commentator on talk radio and state/national
television, most notably on FOX Philadelphia.  He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

“Since 1995 the average mathematics score for fourth-graders jumped 11 points. At this rate we catch up with Singapore in a little over 80 years . .... assuming they don't improve."

- Norman R. Augustine, retired CEO of Lockheed Martin

Let’s keep that quote from a recent George Will column in mind as the school choice debate unfolds.

                                                                 *****

Even in a bad housing market, if someone were to initially offer his home at the lowest acceptable price, he would be called an idiot.  And rightly so.

Likewise, negotiators never come to the table with their bottom line proposal. Doing so would be pointless --- obviously --- since they would be leaving themselves no negotiating room.

It’s Business 101: you set the bar high, and work downward, if need be. It doesn’t get any simpler.

Which makes the current school choice bill in the State Senate, SB 1, all the more puzzling.  Since true choice would be made available only to low-income students, and that’s after a three-year phase-in, the bill would be almost totally ineffectual, affecting an extremely small number of primarily urban students.

Given that Pennsylvania students rank near the bottom in several important categories, such as SAT scores, the only way to right the ship is to enact a statewide, comprehensive school choice program.  Since choice only works if the vast majority of students and schools are able to participate, and there seem to be the votes for that type of program, why the bar is being set so artificially low remains a mystery.

But a good bet is that sponsors Jeff Piccola (R) and Anthony Williams (D) simply didn’t do their homework on the make-up of the new legislature, choosing to dust off an old bill rather than craft a better, more inclusive one.

Because of its limited scope, it’s a bill many view as destined to fail. To think suburban and rural legislators will put up a tough vote for SB 1 --- despite none of their constituents realizing school choice --- and, as a reward, face well-financed union-backed opponents in next year’s elections is just naïve.

So it is somewhat surprising that some school choice advocates on the Right have reacted so illogically to Freindly Fire’s criticism of that bill (as detailed in last week’s column).

If that defeatist attitude is pervasive within the ranks of the Republican base, one thing is certain: the entire agenda of new Governor Tom Corbett and the GOP-dominated House and Senate will be jeopardized. It’s like being pregnant --- you are or you aren’t.  You either push hard to truly solve the state’s unprecedented problems, or you willingly give up your political leverage, compromising your way to meaningless solutions via the Business as Usual approach.

And anyone who thinks the budget deficit, pension bomb and liquor privatization issues can be solved by bowing to insider tactics rooted in political minutia is just whistling Dixie.
 
While education should never be a partisan issue, school choice is more widely supported by Republicans.  So if you can’t pass meaningful legislation with solid GOP majorities in both chambers and a very friendly Governor, you might as well pack it up and turn off the lights.

So let’s take a look at the misguided talking points some proponents are advocating:

SB 1 helps a wide range of students.

The sponsors’ rhetoric simply doesn’t match the substance.  Senators Piccola and Williams talk a great game, saying all the right things:  "We are ready to challenge any…who oppose freedom,” “the civil rights movement of this century,”  “…all kids deserve access to a great education - regardless of race, income or zip code,” and “providing access to a quality education for every child is the most important issue facing our state.”

Last time I checked, the Civil Rights movement created equality for all people, not just some ---which is why the sponsors’ talk rings so hollow.  How can you state that “all kids” and “every child” need access to a great education when this program is so limited in scope?  Where is the “freedom” in that? Leaving the vast majority of students out in the cold is not exactly benefitting “all.”

This is the best school choice bill we can hope for at this time. 

Says who?  The sponsors?  Uhh…no. The legislature was sworn in on January 4, and the bill was introduced January 11.  So are we to believe that the bill was written and a preliminary vote count taken in less than seven days?  Of course not. 

Rather than wait to introduce a meaningful bill, Piccola and Williams jumped the gun with a worthless piece of legislation that, even if passed, will affect virtually no positive change and only bury Pennsylvania that much further.  We don’t have another decade to waste.

We don’t have the votes to pass it, since it didn’t pass in…the mid 90’s when it “failed miserably.”

Honest to God, I couldn’t make up that level of irrationality. This point is so wrong, on so many levels, that it almost doesn’t deserve a response.  But here are the facts.

Comparing the climate for school choice from 1995 and 2011 is ridiculous, for three reasons.

First, the legislature itself is at least 70 to 80 percent different now versus then. Second, despite the Republican wave of 1994, the State House remained Democratic --- by one vote.  It took Rep. Tom Stish’s switch to give the GOP control and the ability to push school choice in that chamber. 

But the wave of 2010 was a different story.  Thirteen seats flipped, giving the GOP a ten seat majority --- and a mandate to reform the system.  And the Republican caucus is more conservative than it was fifteen years ago, with increased support for school choice.

Third, the acceptance of school choice is much more widespread than it was in the 90’s --- a span of time where, not coincidentally, more and more schools have declined academically or closed altogether; Pennsylvania students continue to lag behind their national and global competitors.

With so many elements between those two time periods being night and day, any attempt at comparison is simply insulting.

And for the record, statewide school choice missed passage by no more than five votes in 1995 --- a far cry from “failing miserably.”  That is indisputable, and stated from first-hand experience, as Yours Truly was the Executive Director of the REACH Alliance at the time, the statewide organization pushing school choice.  Oh, and Williams, a State Representative at the time, was a NO vote.

And the question proponents of SB 1 cannot answer: has anyone done an actual vote count?

Here’s the answer: no.  Not the leaders, and not the grassroots activists, for the simple reason that there hasn’t been enough time to do so.  So why advocates would criticize efforts to expand the bill without even undertaking the most basic step ---counting votes --- is mindboggling and counterproductive.

What is Senator Williams’ position on full school choice? 

He certainly says all the right things about expanding choice, but it seems that none of the critics has actually asked Williams his position on a comprehensive program.  If he doesn’t support it, why not? Why should choice be available to some but not all?  Any type of exclusivity dooms the bill before it’s out of the gate, as is evidenced by the growing number of pro-school choicers who are against this bill.

But if Williams does support a larger program, that’s gravy.  And since Williams would most likely bring additional Democrats with him, the likelihood of passing an expanded bill would be extremely high --- hence, the obtuseness of not attempting a more inclusive bill.

This bill helps the middle class through the expanded EITC.

The Educational Improvement Tax Credit (EITC) is a nice program on the margins, and without a doubt has helped many families and kept some schools from closing, but it is NOT school choice; those labeling it as such do a great disservice to true choice.

The EITC allows businesses to give money to a non-profit scholarship organization or educational improvement program and receive a tax credit for that donation. Families with a household income under $60,000 would be eligible (plus $10,000 per child), and the program stops once $100 million worth of tax credits are doled out by the state. ($75 million is dedicated to the scholarship program).

The educational improvement aspect has nothing to do with school choice, so that’s irrelevant to the choice discussion.

Scholarship organizations must be granted approval from the state; upon meeting that requirement, they then solicit business donations to fund the scholarships.

For many businesses, participation in the EITC is based on the economy, so a struggling company may cut back or eliminate their contributions altogether.  Additionally, the EITC is also more subject to reduced funding by the legislature (as happened in 2009) than a statewide school choice program. 

And not to be critical of the EITC, but if it has been so successful, why have so many schools closed since its inception a decade ago?

One aspect of SB 1 is very appealing: rather than just a voucher, the state subsidy that would have been directed to a student’s home school district could be applied to the public, private or parochial school of their choice, not to exceed the cost of tuition.   In some districts, that number could be as high as $10,000.  Since the average total cost to educate a student per year is $14,000, a statewide choice program could provide a very significant cost savings. (As a comparison, the average EITC scholarship is just above $1000).

With school choice, parents receive some of their tax money back to choose their child’s school; with the EITC, they don't get any money back directly (the scholarship entity controls it), and are more limited in the schools from which to choose.

Arguing that the EITC is the savior to middle class families simply has no merit.

                                                            *****

The mentality that school choice must be obtained “one slice at a time” versus going for the “whole loaf” is a flawed one.  The votes should be there to pass statewide school choice now, but the political reality is such that most legislators will only give choice one vote.  There is nothing attractive about facing the wrath of the well-funded teachers’ unions year after year until full choice can be implemented, especially in light of all the other tough votes they will have to make.

With increasing public sentiment advocating school choice, favorable and diverse majorities in the House and Senate, and a committed Governor, the time for meaningful reform is upon us.

Thinking back to the quote that started this column, it’s now or never, so let’s do it right.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com
Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris' recent bestseller "Catastrophe."
Freind, whose column appears nationally in Newsmax, also serves as a guest commentator on Philadelphia-area talk radio shows, and makes numerous other television and radio appearances, most notably on FOX.  He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Pandering To Inner City Reps Could Doom Passage

And so it begins.  The first challenge to Governor Tom Corbett is upon him.  Surprisingly, it’s not from public sector unions, trial lawyers or natural gas opponents, but from within his own Party. 

It’s a challenge that, if handled the right way, would send a message that the Corbett Administration will turn Business As Usual on its head.  If not, the GOP caucus could factionalize, in turn jeopardizing a host of other tough issues on the Governor’s agenda.

And it all revolves around misguided school choice legislation that would do more harm than good.

                                                                 *****

This being School Choice Week, it’s ironic that the Pennsylvania Senate choice bill --- introduced with much hoopla ---  would neither improve schools nor offer true choice.  Instead, it is legislation stuck in the past, once again pandering to the wrong crowd --- the Black Caucus. These are the folks that some choice advocates still naively believe are necessary to court in order to achieve even a modest school choice victory.

They were wrong fifteen years ago, and they’re wrong now.  In fact, not only is Senate Bill 1 a bad bill, but one that will have a difficult time passing.

At issue is the program being limited to low income families, defined as those whose income is at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level – a family of four would qualify at $28,000 household income.  And that’s after a three-year phase-in. 

Left out of the equation is….everybody else. 

Pennsylvania’s students are subpar across the board --- inner city, suburb and rural.  Not only can they not effectively compete with their counterparts in other states (they are 42nd in SAT scores), but, as a whole, are part of our nation’s systemic educational failure.  America’s students consistently rank near the bottom in math, science and literacy when compared to their global competitors.  And since this is an ever-increasing world economy, that’s a recipe for disaster.

The days of competing with Seattle and San Francisco are over; our best and brightest can barely keep up with average students in Singapore, Stockholm and Sydney.

And yet we’re supposed to believe that an extremely limited school choice program for relatively few inner city students is going to be the panacea? 

Give us a break.

One of the bill’s prime sponsors, mid-state Republican Jeff Piccola, should know better.  A longtime champion of education choice, Piccola has nonetheless dropped the ball on this bill, buying into the politically-correct hype that having at least one black legislator on board is the only way to assure passage.  So he allied himself with Democratic Senator Anthony Williams from Philadelphia.

Williams, you may recall, threw himself into last year’s governor’s race late in the game, backed by a few wealthy supporters who pumped more than $5 million into his campaign.  One of Williams’ major issues was school choice.

Fine.  The fact that Williams, up to that point, had never been a leader on school choice raised a few questions, but give him the benefit of the doubt that he is now a choice advocate. But to what level?

True believers realize that school choice will only work if the vast majority of students participate, something impossible with the Piccola-Williams bill.

Why should Williams care?  His constituents will benefit, but the other 99% of Pennsylvania families will be left out in the cold.  Not a tough choice for Tony.

But for the majority of legislators who will be asked to make a tough vote, look for them to start pushing back, countering with a simple message to the bill’s prime sponsors and the Governor:  do it right, or not at all.

                                                             *****

The reason this bill is doomed is simple.  As it stands now, suburban and rural legislators will be asked to incur the wrath of the teachers’ unions (who stand adamantly opposed to the accountability that school choice legislation would bring), while their constituents would not benefit in the least. 

And make no mistake about the teachers’ unions.  While they spent millions in last year’s election cycle, and were soundly defeated, their forced union dues make their campaign war chests virtually unlimited.   Being a presidential election year, 2012 should prove more favorable to them, and they will be unleashing their fury with a vengeance.

So the suburban and rural legislators would make a difficult vote --- and get the worst of both worlds.  Not only would some face tough, union-backed opponents in primary and general elections, but would also feel the anger of constituents who still wouldn’t have a choice where to educate their children. 

But here’s the biggest irony.  The Black Caucus, all Democrats, would almost unanimously vote against the choice bill to avoid union anger.  With a sly smile, they would cast that vote full-well knowing that their constituents would be the beneficiaries.

How’s that for political cowardice?  But it’s what we’ve come to expect from the Black Caucus. 

This is politics at its worst. Vote against a bill that would help the people in your district while hanging your selfless colleagues out to dry, undoubtedly thinning the GOP ranks in the process.

For the Republicans to agree would be an act of monumental stupidity.

There’s another reality that makes this bill almost obsolete, even if it does pass.  Because comprehensive school choice wasn’t passed in 1995, a number of nonpublic schools have since closed, making the options for the low income families that much more limited.  So we would blow another three years on a worthless bill that would realize no significant gains in educational improvement.

Here’s a newsflash for those not familiar with Pennsylvania’s precipitous decline : we can’t afford to twiddle our thumbs for three more years, pretending that the inner city schools are improving, while in reality we fall that much further behind the competition.

The Black Caucus isn’t needed to pass statewide school choice; political will is.  While the education of our children should never be a partisan issue, if you can’t pass school choice with sizable Republican majorities in the House and Senate and a friendly Governor, you’re never going to.

No matter how principled a lawmaker, there are virtually none who should make this vote in the name of Party unity with the upside so small and the downside so large --- potentially large enough to cost them their seat and hurt all Pennsylvanians.

Undeniably, the current system has failed. But the good news is that school choice works. The tragedy will be if we punt away the best opportunity in Pennsylvania history to turn the state around.  If we do, you might as well start converting your dollars into Chinese yuan.

Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com
Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris' recent bestseller "Catastrophe."
Freind, whose column appears nationally in Newsmax, also serves as a guest commentator on Philadelphia-area talk radio shows, and makes numerous other television and radio appearances, most notably on FOX.  He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Author’s note: For your viewing pleasure, a link to FOX 29’s fiery “non-debate” on school strikes follows this column. Is it any wonder why the PSEA won’t talk about the merits of strikes, and instead engages in personal, factually incorrect attacks (in Latin, no less!) on extraneous issues? P.S.: I am sending PSEA the bill for my blown-out eardrums.

To modify the legendary quote from Dean Wormer in Animal House: Arrogant, greedy and aloof is no way to go through life.

But that’s exactly how the teachers’ unions in Pennsylvania have behaved for decades.

With millions in forced union dues, they have constructed a statewide political empire, using their muscle to crush any and all opposition.

To their credit, they have been immensely successful in squeezing every last penny from broke municipalities and overtaxed residents.  In good economies and bad, they demand and receive large raises and benefits, including, in many cases, free healthcare. 

In Bucks County’s Neshaminy School District, for example, the unions have steadfastly refused to renegotiate their healthcare plan.  Can you blame them?  They don’t pay one cent toward their Rolls Royce plan, which costs $27,000 per teacher, per year.  Meanwhile, those in the private sector are shelling out 30 or 40 percent of their healthcare costs, with many shouldering the entire burden.  And when Neshaminy teachers retire, they are guaranteed healthcare until age 65.  And as an added retirement “incentive”, they are handed almost $30,000 just to walk out the door.

Amazingly, Neshaminy isn’t the exception.  Unfortunately, such excess is commonplace throughout the state.

To make the sin mortal, Pennsylvania leads the nation every year in school strikes.  In fact, the Keystone State experiences more teacher strikes than all other states combined.

And that is the reason so many citizens are scratching their heads. Teachers are universally respected for the priceless role they play, but when they strike, especially in a recession where the private sector continues to hemorrhage jobs, it is seen as a slap in the face.

While Pennsylvania teachers are first in school strikes and top five in salaries and benefits, the same cannot be said of student achievement --- as evidenced by their  42nd –ranked SAT scores.

And you can’t just blame city schools for bringing the numbers down.  In suburban Neshaminy, 33 percent of 11th graders aren’t proficient in reading, and 28% can’t perform basic math.

To the unions, money is the cure all. Pay more money (and better benefits) to the teachers while increasing funding for public education, and all the problems will be solved. But we’ve been doing that for decades, and education achievement hasn’t improved.

Given that the global economy is here to stay, our dismal academic performance becomes more dire every year.  Our students are no longer competing against just those in San Francisco and Seattle, but Stockholm, Singapore and Sydney. Yet compared to our top 30 global counterparts, the U.S. is, at best, in the middle of the pack and more often, much lower.

The solution is to instill accountability to our schools and rein in the out-of-control unions.  And with a new Governor and state legislature poised to tackle tough issues, the political will to enact meaningful changes is not just possible, but probable.  Here are two immediate steps that would help bring vast improvement to Pennsylvania’s educational system:

1) Inject competition by enacting school choice.  When parents have a choice in their children's education, schools that do well will attract more students and succeed, and those that continue with the status quo will lose students and fail. The free market system that has served us so well will have the same effect on our educational product. And for the first time in generations, our students will actually learn the skills necessary to succeed in life.

Governor-elect Tom Corbett made school choice a cornerstone of his campaign, and with solid Republican majorities in the House and Senate, look for that to take shape in some form this year.

2) Outlaw school strikes. No public sector union should have the right to strike, which is why our police and firemen are prohibited from doing so.  It is beyond explanation that teachers, in whose hands we place our most valuable asset --- our children --- are not considered equally essential.

Strikes are disruptive to all parties. Parents experience incredible stress in their frantic search for child care, often risking job security by tending to their children, and students’ disciplined approach to schoolwork is shattered, with no possibility of a seamless transition after a long strike.

And who are we kidding? Sure, the law mandates a 180-day school year, but are students really learning anything sitting in a classroom over the Christmas break?  Or in late June, days or weeks after exams have already been taken? In effect, students are held hostage so that teachers can justify their salaries and school districts don’t jeopardize their state subsidies.  

But it is important to understand that teachers are also victimized by strikes.  They become pariahs in their own communities, and respect for their profession take a hit.  Let’s be crystal clear on one thing: many teachers often do not agree with the union leaders’ decisions.  But when that leadership calls for a strike vote --- and refuses to use a secret ballot, as is almost always the case --- there is virtually no chance of opposition.  The risk is simply too high, and the mob mentality rules the day.

At the minimum, there should be a law requiring secret ballot votes for school strikes, monitored by the Pennsylvania Department of Labor. That common sense, practical solution would be overwhelmingly supported by the public --- and the teachers.

If you outlaw strikes, though, basic fairness dictates that there should be a method to resolve an impasse. Perhaps the most viable alternative would be final best offer arbitration (FBO), the same system Major League Baseball uses with great success.

In regular arbitration, both sides throw out a number, with the arbiter often adding them together and dividing by two.  That’s an inefficient system, because when one side makes a reasonable offer while the other side comes in with a pie-in-the-sky proposal, the result is lopsided in favor of the greedier party.

But with FBO, both sides innately understand the need to be reasonable in their proposals or risk getting blown completely out of the box. Cooler heads would prevail with FBO, and that’s most definitely in the taxpayers’ best interest.

Is FBO ideal? No, since you are placing an unelected arbiter in a position of power, but in the real world, it’s the best we have to stop the unaffordable contracts.  It is a classic example of philosophical versus practical, and in this case, the practical side should prevail. 

But there’s a huge irony here. 

Because the union leadership has pushed the envelope for so long, the pendulum may be swinging back hard, to the point of potentially being unfair.

Outlawing school strikes --- as they are in 37 states --- can be enacted like any other legislation: pass both chambers and have the Governor sign the bill.  That may well happen in the near future.

However, arbitration requires a constitutional amendment, a process that will take at least five years.  So the unions are facing the distinct possibility of seeing the right to strike abolished, with no chance of arbitration as recourse.  In effect, our teachers would be working as slaves to the school boards, and that is certainly NOT in anyone’s best interest, most of all our childrens’.

But right or wrong, they made their bed, and now they have to lie in it. 

Aware that their backs were to the wall, the unions spent massively this campaign season on candidates sympathetic to their “plight.”  Unfortunately for them, they suffered huge losses, and the head of the dragon is in danger of being decapitated.

From this point on, it’s a whole new ballgame.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has blazed a path to success in dealing with unions, and enjoys rising popularity every time he calls out their arrogance and greed. And his accomplishments have come with the Democrats controlling both legislative chambers.

In much the same mold, Tom Corbett’s vision is closely aligned with Christie’s, especially on education issues. With the GOP now in firm command of Harrisburg, they may yet provide Pennsylvanians with hope and change we can all believe in.

Taxpayers could only be so lucky.

FOX 29 Non-Debate On School Strikes: Freind Vs. PSEA’s Rob Broderick 
http://www.myfoxphilly.com/dpp/news/local_news/heated-debate%3A--teachers-striking-in-pa

Chris Freind is an independent columnist, television commentator, and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris' recent bestseller "Catastrophe."

Freind, whose column appears nationally in Newsmax, also serves as a guest commentator on Philadelphia-area talk radio shows, and makes numerous other television and radio appearances, most notably on FOX.  He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

(This column first appeared in Philadelphia Magazine)

On a recent weekday at Annunciation B.V.M. Church in Havertown, a Mass was celebrated to pray for and honor police officers --- both those on the front lines and those who have fallen in the line of duty.

It was an emotional service, especially given the number of police who have been brutally slain in the last several years.  The thought of a lonely and distraught spouse raising young children --- including some unborn who never even glimpsed their father--- was so heartbreaking as to be unthinkable.

The worst part is that there’s no rational way to explain, let alone overcome, the absolute senselessness of why these officers were slain.
Where is our country headed when cops are being killed with abandon? 

While all innocent human life is sacred, there is something different about shooting a law enforcement officer. It breaks down the last barrier of respect, and it violates the code that most criminals follow - you don't take shots at police. Period.

Like anything else in life, once that taboo is broken, all bets are off.  In Philadelphia's case, it is now obvious that cops are fair game. The breakdown of the city is virtually complete.

With civility and respect quickly becoming a faded memory, further imperiling our children’s future, people are increasingly asking what, if anything, can be done to reverse this deadly course.

The answer is simple.  It’s just not easy:

School choice.

                                                *****

We have just witnessed the murder trial of cop-killers Eric Floyd and Levon Warner.  Both owners of long rap sheets, they heinously gunned down Officer Stephen Liczbinski in 2008. These animals deserve the death penalty, plain and simple, but that doesn’t answer how you stop such an atrocity from occurring in the future.

If you’re looking to politicians for help, you’ll be blind before that happens.

Every time there’s another crime in the headlines, Mayor Michael Nutter spews the same monotonous babble that the violence epidemic will be curtailed.

But nothing has changed. In fact, despite all the resources put into fighting crime, it's only getting worse.

Whether its flash mobs, citizens getting gunned down, brutal subway attacks ---or cops in the crosshairs, it’s clear that respect for authority is non-existent, and no one is off-limits to the predators.

Philadelphia’s murder, violence and homeless rates are among the highest in the nation, and there’s absolutely nothing to indicate that the situation will improve anytime soon, if ever.

Three things have become readily apparent:

1) The way we did things in the past hasn't worked.

2) What we're doing now isn't having an impact.

3) Unless a bold leader takes steps to institute true reform and eschew band-aid solutions to gaping wounds, the city ---and the region ---will continue its plummet into the abyss.

Here's the part no one wants to admit. There is NO short-term solution.

                                                  *****

We can talk all day about fairy-tale feel-good “solutions” by invoking vague rhetoric: community partnerships, town watches, more police, and of course, the ultimate panacea, banning guns.

But since we've been hearing that for decades, ad nauseum, here's a newsflash to our leaders: none of these things work. And they're not going to, either, because they are tactics without the benefit of a strategy.

Enter school choice.

The dire situation in which we find ourselves boils down to our horrendously bad educational system, and, as a direct result, the lack of hope in our young people.

With no possibility of receiving a quality education, and the prospects for a decent job virtually nonexistent, many of our youth see the dream of a stable and prosperous life as nothing more than an illusion. Faith is lost.

At that point, when people feel they have nothing to live for, or to lose, they resort to risk-taking criminal activity. The end result is despair, fear, violence and murder.

Even though our public schools are in shambles, and many are deathtraps for student and teacher alike, most parents have no options.
When education is trumped by survival, everybody loses.

So why doesn't the system change?

Greed.

Greed to keep the status quo the way it is because it immensely benefits a narrow few. And greed to keep the truth out of sight, buried behind 30 second sound bites.

And the greediest offender of all?  The teachers’ unions.

The unions are terrified of school choice because it would inject competition into our schools, which would 
expose incompetence, and the masses will finally see that the system's failure has nothing to do with a lack of money.

But since so many of our politicians, especially in Philadelphia, are in bed with these unions, school choice programs continue to be thwarted.

Without a doubt, the union leadership wields immense political power because it reaps millions in forced union dues, which are used for partisan political purposes. But how long can we --- and our “leaders” --- be held hostage to them?

Break the stranglehold of the unions, and you break the violence, both in our schools and our city.

When parents have a choice in their children's education, schools that perform will attract more students and succeed, and those that continue with the status quo will lose students and fail. The free market system that has served us so well will have the same effect on our educational product.

For the first time in generations, school choice will allow our students to actually learn the skills necessary to succeed in life.

Because of a quality education, they will have hope for a better tomorrow, understanding that it is better to live in a stable environment than be part of a criminal world in which the lifespan is shorter than those in third-world nations.

Criminals today don't fear the crossfire because they feel they have nothing to live for anyway. Until that mentality is changed, Philadelphians will continue to be held hostage, and more people - including children and police officers - will die.

But instead of action on choice, all we hear are empty promises.

To Mayor Nutter, Gov. Rendell, much of the state legislature and the union leadership who have perpetuated this senseless violence because of their deliberate failure to act, shame on you.

We can only hope that the next Governor and a new legislature will have the political will to do the right thing.

If not, how much more blood will be spilled?

Chris Freind is an independent columnist and investigative reporter who operates his own news bureau, www.FreindlyFireZone.com
Readers of his column, “Freindly Fire,” hail from six continents, thirty countries and all fifty states. His work has been referenced in numerous publications including The Wall Street Journal, National Review Online, foreign newspapers, and in Dick Morris' recent bestseller "Catastrophe."
Freind also serves as a weekly guest commentator on the Philadelphia-area talk radio show, Political Talk (WCHE 1520), and makes numerous other television and radio appearances.  He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

If you’re wondering why race relations in America haven’t improved at all, look no farther than the recent comments of state Senator Anthony Williams.

Shortly before Williams jumped into the governor’s race, he ranted that none of the other Democratic candidates was giving any attention to the black community and the issues faced by that constituency.

In other words, since they are all Caucasian, they were just catering to Whitey and ignoring everyone else.

Gee, and I thought campaigns were supposed to be color-blind.