Children in School - Why USD 501 needs some changes

As someone who is frequently considered "cold" and "unemotional", I found myself crying the other evening. My son, who recently turned eight, was lamenting the fact that he has no friends, while his older sister enjoys and abundance of friends (some might say an over-abundance).

After considering for a while, I realized that this was true, my son really has not ever had a single friend his own age.

But let me give you some background...

At the age of three, my son was diagnosed in Panama City, Panama with an "extreme" case of ADHD, developmental disorders, and possible autism. Once US Immigrations finally (after 6.5 years of waiting) approved his mother's (my wife of 13 years) Visa to enter the US, it took us nearly another 1.5 years of waiting to finally get my son in to see a specialist doctor on a full time basis (have to love our insurance system).

So just as my son was turning six, he was given a diagnosis of Severe ADHD and Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD). The Doctor also stated that it was possible that he had autism.

Our current Doctor has given a diagnosis to my son of ADHD, PDD, with significant indication of High-Functioning Autism, and we are currently waiting on a referral to the KU Med Center Autism unit. We are unsure of when the KU evaluation will be.

So... By now you are asking, "What does this have to do with USD 501?".

The answer is simple. USD 501 has recently made significant changes to the way it treats people with "invisible" disabilities, and these changes are made in the interest of "progress" and "financial efficiency" rather than actually helping out the students in this class.

According to USD 501, all children with the "invisible" disabilities, but who can have a limited interaction with other children in their age group, are "emotionally disturbed". This is the only definition they can be given under our current special education program.

My sons current teacher is wonderful. She cares about every single one of her special students, however, she is given minimal assistance with these children. There are about 10 students in her classroom, and I would estimate that maybe 3 of the students are there for medical disability, and the remainder are there for behavioral/emotional disturbances.

She has one para-professional assisting her.

Right now, she is busy working with the children every moment. She doesn't get a planning period, she doesn't get a break, she doesn't get a rest, because she puts the children above herself. I visited the school to chat with her the other day, and our chat occured while she was trying to eat her lunch, while watching about 8 of her students spend their "study" time reading books on the floor of the gym.

As she was discussing my son with me, calling different children up to give them their "tokens" for good behaviour, calling down other children for not doing what they were supposed to be doing, and meanwhile, she was trying to eat her lunch. I am very impressed with her dedication to our children. Unfortunately, this was the largest "break" that she had all day.

Continuing at this pace, while being expected to spend one-on-one time with each student, deal with each child's individual social, behavioral, emotional and psychological issues, while also trying to keep parents informed of progress and problems..... I just don't see how she can continue this pace for long.

USD 501 NEEDS to support our children, and to come up with a way that our special ed students are PROPERLY classified, and treated as they are diagnosed, not as a one size fits all students solution.

Than, after having individual plans (isn't that what an IEP is for?????), we need to actually provide sufficient help/support to the professionals who are responsible for completing these plans.

The current policies have too many cracks our children can slip through, too many parents who don't care, and too few professionals who are willing to put up with the pressure cooker of our special ed for too little pay.

Followup Info on College Hill Eminent Domain

After exchanging emails with Brendan Long, the attorney for the city of Topeka, he sent me a link to the proposed redevelopment plans made by the city of Topeka for the college hill area:

http://www.topeka.org/pdfs/Washburn_Lane.pdf

Though the proposed retail redevelopment on this was limited to South of 15th street, this could be enough to come into compliance with Kelo.

Though I still believe that eminent domain in this case would be wrong, the city might have also been legally covered by having a plan in place for the nearby area, and in which the city was saying that something did in fact need to be done.

Fortunately, the interested parties have come to an agreement, and we don't have to find out!

The Job Impact of Illegal Immigration

Over the last few years, after I came back to Kansas, I have talked to numerous people about illegal immigration, and discussing how adamant I am about it's wrongness, recommendations on what we can do about it, and of course, discussing the issues that affected my wife's immigration.

I NEVER found a proponent of illegal immigration, and it was rare that I found someone who did not support the quick return of illegals to their own country, with no exceptions.

I was talking to a friend of mine one day, and he actually astonished me with how adamant he was that illegals should be rounded up and deported without mercy. This friend insisted that illegals were causing the increases in crime, the increase in his property tax, and also the reason why he could no longer afford a lot of his medical bills.

It was great to find a kindred soul!

However, a couple weeks later, he was telling me about replacing a roof on a house that he owned. He told me he had been able to hire 10 guys for $50/day each, and by hiring them, he was going to save about $1000/day from hiring legal workers (i.e. he knew they were illegal).

I simply stared at him with a blank look, and walked away.

This incident really did happen, and I'm sure that it happens much more often than we think. However, isn't this something good? Isn't he getting a job done and saving a lot of money while doing it?

However, here are some of the things that must be considered when telling if he really did save money, and if this was something good:

1. How many legal residents made money from this job?
2. How much would legal residents have made in tax money from this job?
3. How much does it cost to provide emergency room medical treatment for these illegal workers?
4. How much higher are our taxes to support these illegal workers children in our schools?

So did he really save money on the job? Maybe on his direct expenses. But, he also ended up paying more in his property taxes and sales taxes to pay for the education and medical for those same workers.

Anyways... This post took about a month from the time I started it to now. And the national debate on illegal immigration has come to the forefront, so I'm going to quit on this series and start talking about more issues (including immigration).

The Law of Immigration - Part 2 - Family Immigration

Many people assume that if a foreign citizen marries an American citizen, that the foreign citizen is automatically granted full privileges to enter and live in the US as a legal resident.

However, sadly to say, this just is not the case. I learned this the extremely hard way!

As a little bit of background, my wife is a Japanese/Latino lady who was born and raised in a Japanese colony just outside of Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Her father is Japanese, living in Nagasaki, Japan, and her mother is Bolivian, living in Santa Cruz, Bolivia. Her father returned to Japan about 15 years ago to live in a retirement/nursing home due to health issues, and her mom stayed in Bolivia due to not wanting to live in Japan ;)

Anyways, I met my wife while I was in the US Navy, stationed in Japan, and we married shortly after I was discharged from the Navy and my return to Japan, where I worked for an extremely large multi-national financial institution. About a year into our marriage, our first child, a daughter who is now 11 (wow, 12 years old this week) was born. A few months after our daughters birth, I was offered, and accepted a significant promotion to relocate to the bank's global headquarters in New York City.

Due to paperwork issues, I went to NYC and started working, while my wife travelled to Bolivia in the heart of South America to get some original and certified copies of specific documents required for her Visa. Once she obtained those documents, I flew to Bolivia, we travelled to the US Embassy in La Paz, where we submitted her application for entry into the US.

Though we were told that the process would take from 3-4 months, suffice it to say that after nearly 2.5 YEARS, I resigned my NYC position, and emigrated to Bolivia to be with my family. When the Bolivian economy crashed in late 1999/early 2000, I was forced by economic necessity to come back to the US, where finally, after getting Senator Phil Gramm involved, the US Embassy in Bolivia FINALLY issued my wife her Visa. Total time to obtain the Visa was 6.5 years. (btw... Senator Brownback told my parents from Kansas that there was nothing he could do since I, who was born and raised in Kansas, was not living here currently, even though he was the chairman of the US Senate Committee on Immigrations at the time.)

The major excuse that was provided to us by the Embassy personnel for the delay? The excuse was that an extremely large number of people trying to immigrate ILLEGALLY to the US were purchasing people's documents in an attempt to obtain legitimate Visas, and thus, even though I myself, a US Citizen, presented the documents IN PERSON, they needed more verification.

In and of itself, this is one of the reasons why I SOOOOO detest illegal immigrants more than any other reason.

So please, the things I ask of people on this topic are simple...

1. Please do not assume that illegal immigrants do not cause harm to other people. They do!
2. Please do not assume that if they are latino and don't speak English, that they are illegal!
3. Please do not assist illegals in continuing the harm that they cause. Do not provide jobs to them of any sort.

The Law of Immigration - Part 1 - The Legality of Anchor Babies

This will probably become a multi-part posting as my views of immigration and illegal immigration are many, and very dear to my heart.

To start off, I fully support the immigration of people to the United States with the intention of working and/or becoming US Citizens.

What I disagree with, is the rampant illegal immigration of people to the United States for whatever reason and the failure of the US Government to take any significant measures to reduce or halt this invasion.

The explosive growth in the number of illegal immigrants to the United States can be traced to numerous reasons, whether it is to escape tyranny, flee from a hostile environment, or simply in search of the American Dream, each illegal immigrant will have his/her reason for shortcutting the legal immigration process, to cross the border and enter the US illegally.

There are many myths concerning illegal immigrants, and some of the ones that I will address in this letter (and later letters) can possibly do much to dispell these myths. Some of the things I will be addressing are:

1. The Legality of Anchor Babies
2. She's my wife and mother of my children so she automatically gets a Visa, right?
3. Illegal Immigrants are good for our country because they provide cheap labor!
4. Illegal Immigrants only take the jobs that Americans don't want!
5. There's Nothing I can do about this (or... It's a Federal Problem)!
6. And more (as I ponder carefully)

The first and foremost issue that I want to address is the Legality of Anchor Babies:

Currently, and baby born in the United States is automatically granted US Citizenship. In addition, any baby born overseas with a documented US Parent is granted this same US Citizenship. A baby born to an illegal immigrant inside of the US is also granted automatic citizenship in the US.

Historically, babies born inside of the US to parents who NOT citizens or LEGAL permanent residents (hence, illegal immigrants), have been granted this same US Citizenship. However, to prevent a separation of the child from his/her parents, the US Immigrations Service (formerly US INS) allowed the parent(s) to become legal residents based upon the citizenship of the child.

However... according to the Immigration and Nationality Act (Links will be added once the uscis.gov site is working correctly again), which is the controlling law over immigration in the United States, a child CANNOT sponsor his/her parents until the age of 21!

So what law do the immigration authorities quote when they offer to let illegal immigrants who have their "anchor baby"? Well, there is none that I have ever heard or seen, it all seems to be the "Well, it would be cruel and inhumane to separate a child from their parents by deporting the parents!"

In my humble opinion, this is WRONG! The parents have no legal status in our country, regardless of the citizenship of their child. The child has no "ties" to this country, other than the fact that his/her parents were breaking the law when the baby was born, and thus, there is nothing tying the child to this country. Thus, why can the parents not TAKE THE ANCHOR BABY back to their country of origin? The family would not be separated, the child would still be an American Citizen (eligible to immigrate to the US legally after 21 years), however, the parents who VIOLATED the law, would not receive unfair benefit from their illegal action.

Some people than ask, "But, wouldn't that be cruel to someone who couldn't/wouldn't take the baby back with them?" This is a choice of the babies parents! If the parents choose to abandon their child here in the US, than there are agencies available that can take appropriate custody of the child for care and/or adoption. This is not the best solution, however, this would only be based upon the abandonment of the child by the parents.

Once again, let's NOT reward people for breaking the law, let's punish them.

The Law of Eminent Domain

At the heart of the law of Eminent Domain, and the battles which have erupted, especially since 06/23/05 when the Supreme Court ruled in the case of "Kelo et al V. City of New London Connecticut et al", is the Fifth Amendment.

If you listen to talk radio (which I do a lot of), you have probably heard of many cases of cities now taking over peoples homes and small businesses in favor of bigger businesses/developers. Simply to raise their tax base.

We currently have a case going on in the city of Topeka, KS where an out-of-town development group has joined forces with a local commercial real estate agent, who (in my opinion only) is one of the slimier people I've ever had the displeasure to meet, to redevelop a small portion of Topeka known as College Hill.

The developers have acquired all the appropriate properties in the area, with the exception of two properties, Oscar's, which is a small bar, and Jerry's Bike Shop, which amazingly enough, is a bike shop. The owner of these two properties (also, Jerry owns his house which is located behind his shop) have refused the offers from the developers, stating that it was not sufficient money to cause them to want to move.

The offers ARE very nice, and if someone were to make a similar offer to me on property which I own, I would probably take it.

Since I have paid particular attention to the bike shop, I will focus specifically on it, and from here on it, if I say something like, "The Property", I am talking specifically about Jerry's house and his bike shop.

The County has assessed the property at about $74,000. The developer assessed the property at about $100,000. The developer has made an offer of $300,000 for the property, and is also willing to provide a set of similar (slightly bigger to tell the truth) properties, located just outside the development area. Jerry has made a counteroffer of $1.8MM, which is to cover relocating and reopening his business/house, and also a significant amount of money to help finance his retirement, in case the business fails in its new home (hmmm, it's just across the street from his current location).

However, here is where the usage of eminent domain is wrong.

The developer has gone whining to the city, that if this situation isn't resolved quickly, they will have to cancel the development project, because it would mean that they could not have the apartments open in time for the Fall, 2007 opening of our local University (Washburn University, about 2 blocks from the development).

So, the city is now threatening to use Eminent Domain to take these final properties, to turn over to the developer, so they can get the $25MM investment, and remove a section of older and run down buildings from the city.

In this case, the usage of Eminent Domain, as decided in the earlier mentioned supreme court decision is not appropriate, nor is it legal.

This is a clear violation of the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution, and there is no other way in which to justify the usage of Eminent Domain. Also, it is wrong. When you have to decide between right and wrong, and it is clear cut that this is wrong, you simply don't do it.

To Jerry: I hope that you can reach an acceptable value, as the city really does need this development.

To the Developers: I hope that you quit dreaming that people will bend over backwards for your money.

To the City: Keep your nose out of other peoples business. Make the city safe, don't get involved in private business matters!

Who am I and what do I stand for?

I have travelled throughout the world and have seen many miraculous things and many heartwrenching things throughout those travels.

I have been rich, and I have been poor. I've worked for the big bucks, and also for near minimum wage. I've been a member of the majority population, I've been a member of a minority population.

I have had many successes, and I have had many failures.

I have lived everywhere from the tropical jungle of South America to the moderate to cold temperatures of Japan.

I have lived in a fairly closed society, I have lived in an extremely open society.

I have rubbed shoulders with the rich and the famous, I have spent the night sleeping in cars to avoid having to sleep on the homeless streets.

I have been to war, and know that at the end of the day, there is a right and a wrong worth fighting for. I don't regret it.

But the most important thing that has happened, is that regardless of the experience, I have learned from it.

The postings on this blog are my opinion of life, liberty, happiness and/or the pursuit thereof. I figure that very few people will agree with me on everything, however, I would also be willing to think that everyone will agree with me on something.

If you agree, let me know, if you don't, let me know. But please, if you don't agree, don't simply tell me that I am wrong, please teach me how I am wrong.