Moment of Silence – Bown v. Gwinnett County School District (1997) / Brown v. Gilmore (2001)

February 12, 2017June 4, 2023 ~ Blue Cereal

Two cases in the early 1960s largely eliminated state-sponsored prayer from public schooling. Engel v. Vitale (1962) and Abington v. Schempp (1963) are to this day touted by the far right as responsible for having kicked God out of schools – leading inevitably to sex, drugs, violence, rock’n’roll, corduroy, divorce, the pill, AIDS, the Clintons, terrorism, and a Kenyan sleeper-cell Mooslim illegitimately seizing the White House for eight long, painful years.

The solution, of course, is to get God back IN our schools by requiring regimented recitation of state-approved chants. He LOVES those! Do this, we are assured, and America’s problems will vanish faster than you can say “civil liberties!”

Alabama led the way in the 1980s with a series of legislation which eventually led to Wallace v. Jaffree (1985), the only “Moment of Silence” case to reach the Supreme Court to date. The Court determined that the state could mandate a “moment of silence” during the school day, but could not lead or even encourage prayer during that time.

The goals of Alabama’s legislation were no secret – state legislators ran on promises to get prayer back into schools, or as close as they could get it. That’s largely what stifled further establishment in Alabama – the Court refused to pretend the history and rhetoric associated with legislation didn’t exist while considering its constitutionality.

Legislative leaders in other states took note and began exercising greater caution as they argued for moments of silence of their own. Suddenly this 60-second period would promote non-violence and academic reflection and gluten-free living and all sorts of things.

A decade after Wallace, Georgia passed its own version of a “moment of silence.” It was challenged by a classroom teacher and ended up in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals as Bown v. Gwinnett County School District (1997). The Court determined that the Moment of Quiet Reflection in Schools Act did NOT violate the Establishment Clause.

The Court’s written opinion is unremarkable, but includes some details of note, such as this bit from what they call the Act’s “uncodified preamble”:

The General Assembly finds that in today’s hectic society, all too few of our citizens are able to experience even a moment of quiet reflection before plunging headlong into the day’s activities. Our young citizens are particularly affected by this absence of an opportunity for a moment of quiet reflection. The General Assembly finds that our young, and society as a whole, would be well served if students were afforded a moment of quiet reflection at the beginning of each day in the public schools.

It’s an absurd bit of glossy nonsense, but it’s constitutional nonsense. We could all probably benefit from drinking more water as well, but I notice no one’s mandating a moment of refreshing hydration each morning. But whatever.

Also in the ‘History of the Case’:

Senator David Scott, the primary sponsor of the Act… represented an urban district in Atlanta, Georgia. He was the Chairman of the Senate Education Committee… and a member of the State Violence Task Force Committee to prevent violence in schools. Senator Scott introduced {the Moment of Silence bill} as a part of a package of legislation aimed at reducing violence among Georgia’s youths.

I realize I’m a bit cynical, but 60 seconds of mandatory head-bowing seems a poor substitute for addressing poverty, mental health, drug addiction, sexual abuse, etc. But perhaps I assume too much.

Senator Scott had observed that after several killings on school campuses, students came together to have a moment of silent reflection. Noting that this moment of silence seemed to be beneficial and calming, Senator Scott believed that providing students with an opportunity for silent introspection at the beginning of each school day would help to combat violence among Georgia’s students.

I guess we’re lucky Georgia didn’t mandate a daily mock funeral ceremony using the same reasoning.

During debates over the bill, some state legislators liked it specifically because it was a step towards school prayer. Others opposed it for the same reason. Wisely, many in favor of the bill went on record arguing that it didn’t promote school prayer or have any religious purpose at all. That gave the Court enough cover as to the purpose of the bill that they could in good conscience consider it “religiously neutral.”

The teacher who initiated the case, Brian Brown, argued that the law violated the Establishment Clause and cited the “Lemon Test” to prove it. No surprise, then, that the 11th Circuit used Lemon to respond.

The first prong of the Lemon test requires that the challenged statute have a “clearly secular purpose” … However, the statute’s purpose need not be exclusively secular… A statute violates the Establishment Clause if it is “entirely motivated by a purpose to advance religion” …
To ascertain a statute’s purpose, it is, of course, necessary to examine the language of the statute on its face… It is also appropriate to consider the legislative history of the statute and the specific sequence of events leading up to the adoption of the statute.

The Court cites both the law itself and its context and presentation by way of establishing that the law explicitly avoids promoting religious activities during this magical minute. At the same time, should a child choose to bow their head or clutch their rosary beads during the moment of life-altering focus and de-violencing, the state may not discourage them from so doing.

The Court specifically addresses the difference in dynamics between this situation and Jaffree – largely distinguished by what was said in debates leading up to passage, and contemporaneous legislation with similar goals.

Issues involving motivation or purpose of pro-religious legislation are sometimes determinative, sometimes merely a factor in the larger discussion, and (especially recently) sometimes completely ignored altogether. Nevertheless, just to be safe, lawmakers are highly encouraged to be completely disingenuous when proposing and debating such legislation in order to assure they pass judicial muster. They needn’t feel bad. It’s like Jesus said, “You must obscure the truth, because the truth will just get in the way.”

In Jaffree, the primary sponsor of the Alabama statute and the Governor of Alabama both explicitly conceded that the purpose of the Alabama statute was to return prayer to the Alabama schools, and Alabama failed to present any evidence of a secular purpose… In contrast, in this case, the primary sponsor of the Act indicated that the Act had a secular purpose.
It is true, as Bown argues, that some legislators expressed the desire to return prayer to Georgia’s schools and supported the Act for this reason. However, it is also true that other legislators felt that the Act did not involve school prayer…

You get the idea.

Under the second prong of the Lemon test, a statute violates the Establishment Clause if its primary effect is to advance or inhibit religion…
The announcement made over the school intercom by Principal Hendrix indicated only that there would be a moment of silence to reflect on the day’s activities. This announcement in no way suggested that students should or should not pray silently during the moment of quiet reflection…
There is no indication in this case that any teacher encouraged prayer in violation of the guidelines stated in the Administrative Bulletin. There is no evidence in this case that any students were exhorted to pray, favored for praying, or disfavored for not praying…

The Court then contrasts this dynamic with situations in which students may feel indirectly, if not explicitly, coerced, such as in Lee v. Weisman (1992) and finds they’re not at all similar. There’s no advancement of religion here.

The third prong of the Lemon test dictates that the statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion…
We conclude that there is no excessive entanglement in this case.

Yeah, that was going to be a tough sell at best.

All that the Act requires is that the students and the teacher in charge remain silent during the moment of quiet reflection. Teachers are not required to participate in or lead prayers, nor are they required to review the content of prayers during the moment of quiet reflection…

They’re not only “not required;” they’re specifically prohibited from so doing.

The fact that a teacher must stop a student who prays audibly or otherwise makes noise during the moment of quiet reflection does not result in excessive government entanglement with religion. There are many times during any given school day when teachers tell their students to be quiet and when audible activity of any kind is not permitted. The fact that this particular period of silence is mandated statewide does not create entanglement problems.

A few short years later, Virginia took their turn. The resulting case, Brown v. Gilmore (2001), was heard and decided by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and the outcome was basically the same. It’s notable for being the first instance I’ve come across of the specific phrasing used by many state legislatures since, including Oklahoma’s. Here’s how Oklahoma’s statute reads, in case you’re curious:

The board of education of each school district shall ensure that the public schools within the district observe approximately one minute of silence each day for the purpose of allowing each student, in the exercise of his or her individual choice, to reflect, meditate, pray, or engage in any other silent activity that does not interfere with, distract, or impede other students in the exercise of their individual choices.

But there’s more…

The Attorney General of the State of Oklahoma is hereby authorized to intervene in any legal proceeding to enforce the provisions of this act and shall represent any school district or employee named as a defendant therein.

Ha! Defensive, much?

Several similar cases have produced comparable results in other federal courts. They each have their own quirks, but the pattern is clear.

With the sudden national lurch to the right (and away from even token concern with civil liberties or the sincerity of inflicted faith), it remains to be seen what may come next. For now, however, the “moment of silence” – a pointless exercise designed only to allow legislators to walk right up to that line separating church and state and kick dirt on its trousers – is on solid constitutional ground.

Presumably this is already rolling back forty years of decadence and cultural decline. If not, we might have to up it to two minutes.

Blue Serials (2/8/17)

February 8, 2017July 31, 2023 ~ Blue Cereal

I haven’t been doing the weekly wrap-ups recently. I’m never quite sure whether anyone reads them, despite the consistently high quality of the goodies within!

But there’s simply been TOO MUCH quality edu-bloggery lately not to compile it and celebrate a bit. If you’ve been busy, or distracted by national shenanigans, or tuned out after the elections, this might be a good time to tune back in for a bit.

Because it’s February, and it’s starting.

Here’s what you simply SHOULD NOT HAVE MISSED recently from #OklaEd’s best thinkers, explainers, and ranters. God, I love these people and that… stuff they do with the words and point-making and such. It’s glorious.

Oklahoma Definitely Deserves Better – Rick Cobb, OKEducationTruths. #OklaEd

Cobb has never pulled punches, and there’s no indication he’ll be getting less grumpy anytime soon. After being accused of thuggery and non-existent bad behavior and banned from a school choice event a few weeks ago, he’s turned his sights to the new legislative session and the so-called “better plan” that was so trendy as a tool to crush SQ779 last November.

“You can peruse the list of donors who contributed this money (all between October 1 and December 31 of 2016). If you know any of these people (or work for any of the companies that contributed), maybe you can ask them about that better plan. I’d love to hear it.”

Yeah, wouldn’t we all. I’m pretty sure it’s a very concise plan, probably consisting of no more than two words directed towards teachers across the state. The first begins with ‘F’, the second with ‘Y’.

Peruse Cobb on the Twitters and see what else is on his mind. He’s the foundational source of all things #OklaEd and their implications.

Past, Future, and Present – Meghan Loyd, For The Love. #OklaEd

“The past two weeks have been the worst in my teaching career. I have worked crazy long hours, and then I come home and cry over it… I have allowed my emotional needs and hurt negatively impact my students. I want to build a positive culture, and I have done nothing of the sorts.

Then my college professor posted this on Facebook…”

Loyd waxes raw on the power of transparency, community, and encouragement. Loyd is our go-to unicorns and rainbows supplier on #oklaed, but she’s been wounded this year. Doubting. Angry. What she refuses to be is afraid, or silent. For the love, she keeps putting it out there.

Follow her on the Twitters and give a little of it back to her, but with donuts. She does still crave herself some donuts.

How The Chamber Killed Teacher Raises – Mindy Dennison, This Teacher Sings. #OklaEd

Dennison is done messing around. In this post, as with last week’s Better Find Someone To Blame, she’s calling out people and organizations by name and daring them to correct her.

“They solicited and spent almost a million dollars to deny my family a $5,000 raise, and simultaneously endangered the quality of education for 700,000 school children by contributing to the mass exodus of our teachers. If I had to guess how much money they throw into a campaign for their “better plan”, my guess is somewhere between $0 and $0.”

Hey, I’m on her side. Even if I weren’t though, I’d think twice before trying to play rhetorical games with her again.

Follow her on the Twitters and see what else she’s had enough of.

An Open Letter to Prospective Teachers – Rob Miller, A View From The Edge. #OklaEd

Seems like we should finish with some positives, doesn’t it? And that’s what this is, despite one of my favorite openings of the entire realm:

“If you are a young person just entering college, or perhaps a millennial or Gen X-er looking for a career change, you should definitely not consider a career as a public school teacher. Seriously, don’t do it.

Wasting your potential as a classroom teacher is a really bad idea. Do something else. Anything else.”

Not that Miller has been stuck on his own unicorn farm lately. He’s tackled some of the inane rhetoric of our own legislators and written numerous posts about the Trump Administration and the atrocity that is DeVos.

Fortunately, though, he’s still pretty good at finding those reasons to push on – or up, as the case may be. I hope whatever else happens, they don’t beat that out of him anytime soon.

Find Miller on the Twitters and see what else he’s pushing.

Books To Read As We Survive Trying Times – Claudia Swisher, Fourth Generation Teacher. #OklaEd

“I recently saw an observation that when Barack Obama was elected, sales of guns spiked… and now with the election of Donald Trump, we are seeing a resurgence in the sale of books. As a Reading for Pleasure teacher, I find that fascinating… and hopeful.”

Swisher presents the first of four lists of recommended reading for the days ahead. And belief that it can matter.

You gotta love that.

Find Swisher on the Twitters and let her know what YOU’RE reading to get through. Be careful, though – she’ll probably encourage you and stuff.

Alright my darlings, that’s it for this Special Edition of Blue Serials.

I’d tell you things are going to be OK, but I don’t know if that’s true. I’d tell you we can turn this around, but I don’t know if that’s true, either.

What I can tell you is that you are some of the best this fallen world has to offer. You are noble and funny and gracious and kind. Smarter than you think you are and mattering more than the ugly ones will admit.

Fight well, and in love and light. That’s the only kind of fight worth winning in the end.

A Wall of Separation – Bown v. Gwinnett County School District (1997)

February 8, 2017June 4, 2023 ~ Blue Cereal

The Court’s written opinion is unremarkable, but includes some details of note, such as this bit from what they call the Act’s “uncodified preamble”:

The General Assembly finds that in today’s hectic society, all too few of our citizens are able to experience even a moment of quiet reflection before plunging headlong into the day’s activities. Our young citizens are particularly affected by this absence of an opportunity for a moment of quiet reflection. The General Assembly finds that our young, and society as a whole, would be well served if students were afforded a moment of quiet reflection at the beginning of each day in the public schools.

It’s an absurd bit of glossy nonsense, but it’s constitutional nonsense. We could all probably benefit from drinking more water as well, but I notice no one’s mandating a moment of refreshing hydration each morning. I’m just saying.

Also in the ‘History of the Case’:

Senator David Scott, the primary sponsor of the Act… represented an urban district in Atlanta, Georgia. He was the Chairman of the Senate Education Committee… and a member of the State Violence Task Force Committee to prevent violence in schools. Senator Scott introduced {the Moment of Silence bill} as a part of a package of legislation aimed at reducing violence among Georgia’s youths.

I realize I’m a bit cynical, but 60 seconds of mandatory head-bowing seems a poor substitute for addressing poverty, mental health, drug addiction, sexual abuse, etc. But perhaps I assume too much.

Senator Scott had observed that after several killings on school campuses, students came together to have a moment of silent reflection. Noting that this moment of silence seemed to be beneficial and calming, Senator Scott believed that providing students with an opportunity for silent introspection at the beginning of each school day would help to combat violence among Georgia’s students.

I guess we’re lucky Georgia didn’t mandate a daily mock funeral ceremony using the same reasoning.

During debates over the bill, some state legislators liked it specifically because it was a step towards school prayer. Others opposed it for the same reason. Wisely, many in favor of the bill went on record arguing that it didn’t promote school prayer or have any religious purpose at all. That gave the Court enough cover as to the purpose of the bill that they could in good conscience consider it “religiously neutral.”

The first prong of the Lemon test requires that the challenged statute have a “clearly secular purpose” … However, the statute’s purpose need not be exclusively secular… A statute violates the Establishment Clause if it is “entirely motivated by a purpose to advance religion” …
To ascertain a statute’s purpose, it is, of course, necessary to examine the language of the statute on its face… It is also appropriate to consider the legislative history of the statute and the specific sequence of events leading up to the adoption of the statute.

The Court cites both the law itself and its context and presentation by way of establishing that the law explicitly avoids promoting religious activities during this magical minute. At the same time, should a child choose to bow their head or clutch their rosary beads during the moment of life-altering, the state may not discourage them from so doing.

The Court specifically addresses the difference in dynamics between this situation and Wallace. It’s largely a matter of what was said in debates leading up to passage, and surrounding legislation with similar goals.

I cannot emphasize this enough. All subsequent efforts to nudge religious rituals back into government schooling will be made with an awareness that public arguments and discussions may be factored in to any resulting constitutional challenges. Lawmakers are essentially encouraged to be disingenuous if they wish to pass judicial muster.

In Jaffree, the primary sponsor of the Alabama statute and the Governor of Alabama both explicitly conceded that the purpose of the Alabama statute was to return prayer to the Alabama schools, and Alabama failed to present any evidence of a secular purpose… In contrast, in this case, the primary sponsor of the Act indicated that the Act had a secular purpose.
It is true, as Bown argues, that some legislators expressed the desire to return prayer to Georgia’s schools and supported the Act for this reason. However, it is also true that other legislators felt that the Act did not involve school prayer…

You get the idea.

Under the second prong of the Lemon test, a statute violates the Establishment Clause if its primary effect is to advance or inhibit religion…
The announcement made over the school intercom by Principal Hendrix indicated only that there would be a moment of silence to reflect on the day’s activities. This announcement in no way suggested that students should or should not pray silently during the moment of quiet reflection…
There is no indication in this case that any teacher encouraged prayer in violation of the guidelines stated in the Administrative Bulletin. There is no evidence in this case that any students were exhorted to pray, favored for praying, or disfavored for not praying…

The third prong of the Lemon test dictates that the statute must not foster an excessive government entanglement with religion…
We conclude that there is no excessive entanglement in this case.

Yeah, that was going to be a tough sell at best.

All that the Act requires is that the students and the teacher in charge remain silent during the moment of quiet reflection. Teachers are not required to participate in or lead prayers, nor are they required to review the content of prayers during the moment of quiet reflection…

They’re not only “not required;” they’re specifically prohibited from so doing.

The fact that a teacher must stop a student who prays audibly or otherwise makes noise during the moment of quiet reflection does not result in excessive government entanglement with religion. There are many times during any given school day when teachers tell their students to be quiet and when audible activity of any kind is not permitted. The fact that this particular period of silence is mandated statewide does not create entanglement problems.

A few short years later, Virginia took their turn. The resulting case, Brown v. Gilmore (2001), was heard and decided by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals and the outcome was basically the same. Several others have produced comparable results in other federal courts. They each have their own quirks, but the pattern is clear.

With the recent lurch of all three branches to the right, and away from even token concern with civil liberties or sincere belief, it’s hard to guess what may come next. But for now, the “moment of silence” – a pointless exercise designed only to allow legislators to walk right up to that line separating church and state and kick dirt on its trousers – is on solid constitutional ground.

It remains to be seen whether the practice is sufficient to roll back forty years of decadence and cultural decline. We might have to up it to two minutes.

The Pedagogy of Antoine Roussel

February 7, 2017July 31, 2023 ~ Blue Cereal ~ 1 Comment

Most of you are probably unfamiliar with the name “Antoine Roussel.”

He’s not a traditional educator – or an educator at all. He’s a professional hockey player. A personal favorite of mine, actually.

And I have the t-shirts to prove it.

Pro hockey, like any other high-end form of athletic entertainment, is home to the elite. That’s why we pay big money to watch them – because they’re better than everyone else at what they do. Lots better.

Ridiculously better.

Nevertheless, there is much to learn from Roussel for those of us in a very different world. A world in which many people do what we do, for not very much money. A world in which it’s eternally debatable whether we’re winning or losing, and no one can seem to agree about exactly what our job is, let alone whether or not we’re doing it well.

I’d like to introduce you to the man fans call the Feisty Frenchman, the Rousster, or DangeRouss – all names I’m pretty sure he hates. In fact, if it comes up, don’t tell him I shared those, covenu?

I’d like to tell you why he’s one of my edu-heroes. And yes, it’s a list. Like cargo pants or cover bands, contrived blog-lists never quite go out of style.

1. Have a plan, but be ready to follow unexpected paths.

Roussel was born in Roubaix, France. For those of you who don’t follow God’s Favorite Game, professional hockey players don’t generally come from France. Rouss is one of only three currently playing in the NHL.

He played rugby as a youngster. It was hot out there on the field, so he kept going to the sidelines to get water. Once Antoine went, teammates followed.

We all have that kid in class – not necessarily intentionally disruptive, but a natural leader who often chooses directions we wish they wouldn’t. And they never go alone.

It made his coach crazy, and eventually it was clear rugby wasn’t going to work. His mother figured hockey would be cooler – like, literally.

He played in France, and eventually came to North America. For several years he bounced around in the minor leagues, sometimes getting looks from NHL affiliates, but not quite finding his role.

The Dallas Stars underwent a major rebuild several years ago, and in 2012 picked up this relative unknown for his reputation as a gritty, in-your-face presence on the ice. It wasn’t long before he was a fan favorite not only for his skill set, but his infectious grin and borderline psychotic drive towards success.

Was it his destiny? Who cares? It’s where he is – and he’s making it count. Apply this as you like to your professional journey, your learning journey, or any given lesson or unit. Sometimes you take it where you decide; sometimes you let it go where it wishes.

2. Standards matter, but growth matters more. Value effort and meaningful gains.

It’s disingenuous to suggest that natural talent doesn’t matter – in hockey, in teaching, in being a student. It does. Whatever combination of genetics and upbringing and luck make for success, sometimes it just… is what it is.

But there’s much to be said for sheer force of will. It’s not a guarantee, but determination sure changes the odds. Sometimes exponentially.

Most of us have a soft spot for that kid who gives 137% whether or not they become the most brilliant student or the most talented player as a result. That mindset stirs greatness. It changes the game not only for that player, but for everyone around them. It changes attitudes, and perceptions, and those intangibles that make everything better.

You want a growth mindset? Don’t be so quick to celebrate lazy excellence – student work that meets your basic requirements but cost them little to do so. Acknowledge their gifts, but ask them how they could stretch themselves productively.

You want a growth mindset? Know when to embrace faltering steps forward from those short on talent, passion, or both. Recognize widows’ mites when they’re given.

I know there’s a whole ‘grit’ argument still raging on the more legit blogs, and that’s fine. What I’m talking about, though, isn’t externally imposed discipline or inflicted hardships. It’s simply recognizing the long-term value of deciding to keep going. To work harder. To figure things out. It’s finding ways to make yourself better and demand of the universe that progress will occur – with or without its cooperation.

That’s you, too, teacher-type. Roussel’s energy is exceptional even among the elite – it’s productive, and diverse. When things are good, he takes it up a notch. When things are bad, he takes it up two.

Don’t give up. Don’t stop trying things. Qui n’avance pas, recule.

3. Students can’t excel if they feel bound by directions; teachers can’t excel if they’re always worried about breaking the rules.

Roussel plays on the edge, sometimes past it. There are times I’d rather he made better decisions in the moment. But that same fearlessness that gets him into trouble also makes him a perpetual force for good on the ice. Coach Ruff is periodically asked after a game how he’ll address something Rouss did that in retrospect hurt the team more than it helped, and his answer is always the same. “It was the wrong decision, and we’ll look at that. But he’s out there every day giving us everything he has. I’m not going to quash that.”

I’m not suggesting it’s ever OK to be unethical. It’s never OK to hurt or misuse your kids, for any reason. But every great teacher knows that you can’t build the relationships you need to draw out the best in some students, or establish the dynamics required of a productive classroom, if your primary concern at every step is whether or not everything you say or do would play well at a disciplinary hearing.

Know the content, and the pedagogy. Know the standards, and the policies. But when it’s time to make things happen, follow your gut and do what’s best for learning and for kids – not what’s safest for you.

As to assignments and other directions, give students enough guidance that they have structure, and support. Unclear expectations can be crippling. But don’t let the rules take over like evil robots in bad sci-fi. The rubrics were made to support the learning; the learning isn’t there to satisfy the rubrics.

4. Sometimes it’s OK to irritate other people.

Roussel is not what you’d call a ‘goon,’ but he is an agitator. He thrives on targeting top players on the other team and annoying the hell out of them. Why? Because their focus starts to become him, rather than playing the game. They make stupid mistakes which work to his team’s advantage.

In terms of education, it’s rarely useful to irritate people just for kicks. But the idea that we should never annoy leadership, or parents, or political power, or one another, is silly. Sometimes the pot needs stirring so the dross rises to the top. Sometimes insight requires provocation.

I personally learn a great deal by lobbing a few conversational hand grenades when I meet new people and seeing what happens. I don’t always make new friends that way, but I sure do learn a great deal. And the friends I do have tend to be smarter than me, bluntly honest, and quick to call me out. Why have them otherwise?

(And it’s ALWAYS OK to taunt Chicago, I assure you. They eat it up and give back twelve baskets-full.)

5. Recognize outbursts of greatness when they occur.

Roussel signed with the Stars in 2012 and scored in his first game. That makes a mark. He’s rarely a top scorer on the team, but he’s often in the top dozen players in the LEAGUE in terms of game-winning goals. He always leads the team and sometimes the entire NHL in penalty minutes, but he’s getting better at picking and choosing which penalties are worth taking, and in what circumstances.

As a teacher, be good every day if you can. Never give less than your best. But be great sometimes. Step up when it matters most.

More importantly, you want to keep kids with you even a little? Recognize the good moments. Treat those random bits of brilliance as the natural greatness you always suspected they were hiding. Be genuinely thankful for the bits of each kid that make them interesting, or fun, or worth tolerating for one more day. You’ll accomplish more and last way longer.

6. People always matter.

Roussel is a fan favorite for his on-ice performance. Off the ice, however, he’s one of the most approachable and grateful professionals in the league. He avoids the easy clichés many players fall into doing countless interviews, instead giving his real self for every reporter, every time. At away games, Rouss will find the green jerseys in the crowd and celebrate with them when the Stars score. It’s a simple thing – a small, silly thing – but the kind that changes people’s entire experience.

When fans line up for autographs as the team leaves the practice arena, most players are professionally polite. Rouss is approachable and charming. My wife and I were caught off guard in the stands one day as he came up to fetch a couple of friends sitting nearby.

“Oh! Um… Rouss!”

It would have been easy to feel awkward or foolish, but he grinned like we were doing him some huge favor by noticing him at all. That’s not about us – that’s just how he treats people. All of them.

It’s adorable.

You know the clichés in education. They don’t care how much you know, etc. People always matter. Always. First. Every time. Small people. Make it happen, or you have no business trying to teach them anything.

7. Do what needs doing, as best you can do it. That’s good enough. You are good enough.

As in many sports, hockey players tend to grow into certain ‘roles’ they’re expected to play. Sometimes circumstances change, and flexibility is required.

Not being pegged into a single role has actually benefitted the winger. Though Roussel often plays on the Dallas Stars’ checking line, {he’s recently} found himself providing support to his team’s top players such as Jason Spezza, Patrick Sharp and Ales Hemsky.
“I’m not a top-line guy, but I’ve been up and down the lineup, just helping the team do whatever we need,” Roussel said. “If it’s playing on the fourth line or the top, I can do it all. It’s a good confidence {Coach Lindy Ruff} has given me sometimes. I appreciate that.”

Be realistic, and advocate for yourself – absolutely. But once planted, bloom like you mean it. That manure they’re dumping is just more fertilizer, baby – and that rain is just, well… rain.

Conclusion

Nothing I do is nearly as entertaining or impressive as Roussel or any other elite performer, although I like to think it has value in its own larger way. We live vicariously through those we cheer, and whether he’s winning or losing at the moment, I can’t help but draw hope and encouragement from a wild-eyed Frenchman on skates, who simply doesn’t know when to quit.

You may, of course, choose someone else as your role model if you like – but mine can probably beat yours up.

Mo Money Mo Problems: House Bills 1400 and 1401 (Guest Post: Rep. John Montgomery, HD62)

January 29, 2017July 31, 2023 ~ Blue Cereal

NOTE: Rep. John Montgomery was elected to represent HD-62 (Comanche, think “West of Lawton”) in 2014 and re-elected this past November. I consider him a friend to #oklaed and a decent guy all ’round. He’s also unexpectedly amusing when he’s mocking me privately on social media. Like, he’s REALLY good at it. That’s rare.

Not the mocking part – I get that a LOT. But being good at it – THAT’S a gift.

When I started my recent post on positive potential legislation sitting in the OK Legislative queue recently, I reached out to him along with several other legislators asking what I might be overlooking. Rep. Montgomery brought up the bills he’s discussing here, and explained them to me as clearly as could be expected one Twitter app to another. But I know my strengths, and economics-made-easy isn’t among them. I half-jokingly suggested he should just write a guest blog explaining it instead.

And he did.

I very much appreciate him taking the time to share this information and explanation here. I wish more of our elected leaders would be so communicative.

While I cannot endorse all of the messages Notorious B.I.G. puts out there, the name of this song seems fitting to a discussion on state finances. The underlying wisdom seems to hold true elsewhere: more than a few articles have been written pointing out that up to a third of lottery winners end up declaring bankruptcy.

I wish I could make a blog post about state finance more exciting. Nobody likes talking about checkbook balancing, or for the hip young readers out there, paying your bills with Venmo or Google Wallet. No, we cannot just pop open a GoFundMe and plug our budget holes, and yes I have tried.

Much like those lottery winners, Oklahoma has also in a way won the economics equivalent of the winning numbers by way of our oil and gas resources. Unfortunately, we as as a state have similar problems to many winners – just one a larger scale. Mental health, divorce, tensions with others, and… trouble keeping our finances in order. The Economist has written rather extensively on what could be termed the “resource curse.”

In my humble opinion, it is time we turned our Achilles heel into our greatest blessing.

Fortunately, there is a way to insure permanent investments into education and put ourselves in an incredible position if we make the long-term commitment. I realize in a day and age when some folks my age are setting up dates at the swipe of a screen, that “long term” might be somewhat of a foreign concept for some. However, if you talk to more than a handful of my constituents and I suspect many Oklahomans, a long-term plan and vision is what they want most out of state government and other community leaders.

For the better part of two years, I have been watching and analyzing how our revenue streams function, as well as considering what other states (or countries) do that might make an improvement for Oklahomans. One idea is to set up a permanent fund or an endowment or two that would take in some level of revenue and grow large enough that interest from the fund can replace or eliminate our reliance on volatile revenue sources, as well as help stabilize the way we approach other revenue as well. Ideally, this would have a tangential effect of unleashing the spirit and ingenuity of Oklahomans.

“Whoa whoa whoa now, don’t hurt yourself, Mr. Big Talk,” I can almost hear you saying. “We’re on to you legislator types and your fancy-but-often-bewildering plans!”

Backing it up a bit, if we carry our personal finance analogy forward, we could say that we need to plan for retirement primarily from our oil and gas tax revenue, but secondarily from other potential tax sources. You know, diversify.

If I had a dollar every time I heard, read, and said “we need to diversify our state economy,” this discussion would be unnecessary because the state would be LOADED. Unfortunately, that’s not how it works.

Another problem with “diversify our state economy,” is that there is no big red “that was easy” button we can push and all of the diversity happens. Many very intelligent, caring, and tireless legislators and community leaders before me have made significant efforts in this direction – and with a high degree of success. Contrary to what many might believe, this most recent downturn could have been much worse for many Oklahomans.

The State Chamber of Oklahoma estimates that the oil and gas industry makes up roughly 13-15% of our state economy. However, state government reliance on tax revenue from the oil and gas industry can reach as high as 25% of state revenue.

Houston, we have a problem.

If you want us to try to take the bumps out of that chart above, I would refer you to HB2763 from last year. Fortunately, 2763 passed and we will stabilize that revenue in future years. http://www.oklegislature.gov/BillInfo.aspx?Bill=HB2763&Session=1600

If you think we also need a long-term vision and plan, then keep reading.

Fortunately for us, many states and several countries have trail-blazed the idea of saving sizeable amounts of what may not be an indefinite source of revenue and using the interest earned from investments, equities, real estate, etc., as revenue. Many countries like Norway, almost every country on the Arabian Peninsula that can pull oil from the sand with a straw, and most recently Israel, have set up a savings plan like this. Norway is sitting on just shy of $1 trillion in their fund, depending on which way the markets are going and if there’s a notion of divesting from the latest company to militarize farts. Saudi Arabia has been eating some of its $700 billionish fund in its global War on Fracking.

In the United States, 8 of the 9 states that rely heavily on oil or gas severance/gross production taxes have a permanent fund, endowment, or major savings plan for that revenue. I would not be writing this if Oklahoma were one of those 8.

North Dakota has become probably the most famous and envied. Voters there approved setting aside 30% of their oil and gas revenue into a Legacy Fund in 2010. That fund has grown to over $4 billion due to an oil production explosion of literally ten-fold over the past decade (compared to doubling in Oklahoma). They also set aside 5% of the revenue into an education endowment which has been growing since the late 1990s. The interest from the fund goes to schools, and thus it’s not hard to see how the ten-fold production increase translated to double digit education spending increases there.

They did not establish how the Legacy Fund would be used, which has caused some debate given the energy downturn. The state spent its $750 million rainy day fund to shore up against what we have called “revenue failure” here: that spending was coupled with a 3-4% across the board cut as well. This next two-year budget does not look much better for them either.

The state that has not received much attention in this regard is Alaska. 90% of state revenue there comes from the energy industry, so they were talking about $3-4 billion shortfalls most recently. However, they are also sitting on a $50 billion Permanent Fund that is used to generate interest and kick out a couple grand to each man, woman, and child in the state. They, by the way, have a $10 billion Rainy Day Fund that they technically owe $3-4 billion to because paying the fund back is required. There are some hot debates going on in that state over budget too of course, but the difference of position they are in financially is not by any accident

We should take what these other places have done, and put Oklahoma at the forefront of state financial dynamism. This year, I have introduced HB1400 and HB1401 to do just that.

HB1401 is primarily geared toward what I have spent most of this post talking about doing: setting aside a significant part of our oil and gas gross production tax revenue into what would be called the Legacy Fund. 20% of future revenue would be dedicated in this way. The fund would have subfunds for common education and higher education, who currently receive up to roughly the first $145 million of this revenue (which has actually caused some issues in the most recent downturn, but that’s a different topic). That would be directed into endowments that would become large enough that modest investment earnings could replace that revenue, permanently within about 10-12 years. Ideally, we would continue putting some part into these sub endowments after then, and can redirect another part of the funding either for more savings or bolstering current spending at the time.

HB1400 establishes a Vision Fund. It is aimed toward a position Alaska finds itself in: not levying the traditional, major state level taxes on income and sales. Once fully implemented, Oklahoma would be perhaps the second state to be in a position to eliminate a major tax source while providing a potent source of funding for education, research and development, and a group that was created after the 1980s oil bust called Oklahoma Center for Science and Technology (OCAST) – a group whose basic mission is the diversification of our state’s economy. We will build this fund through a structure in our state budget process which ends up leaving cash on the table to be appropriated, in addition to taking in a crude version of what could be called “micro-financing” where we will take a barely noticeable fraction of revenue each year and set it aside.

This plan will require a high degree of resolve, and it likely requires shielding from short term whims and thinking that have held our state back. We must rally behind a Vision or we leave no Legacy. Let’s not throw away our shot.