Jack Franks’ Liberal Politics Hurt the Most Needy and Disadvantaged Kids while Voting Against Saving Hundreds of Millions of Dollars each Year
Teachers unions want legislators who are automatic votes for what they want, when they really want it.
Jacks Franks is one of those automatic votes for the Illinois teachers unions.
For ten years he has tried hiding this position.
Behind public self-promotions he is for “reform” and fiscal responsibility.
He has even claimed to be a fiscal conservative while supporting teacher unions’ right to strike that drives up costs to taxpayers.
Do front line police officers and fire fighters work year round and around here earn $80,000 or $100,000 as public employees can for teaching elementary or high school gym classes less than nine months of the year.
The teachers unions have more money and political clout in Illinois than any other special interest.
This explains how police officers and fire fighters can get fired for royally screwing up on the job while teachers have tenure.
It was impossible for Franks to hide from an important vote in the House recently.
The issue and legislation was simple.
He was either for helping the neediest kids stuck in Chicago’s worst schools or he was voting the way the teachers unions wanted him to vote.
The details of what Franks voted against would have let up to 30,000 kids’ parents have the choice of vouchers to get out of Chicago’s failing schools.
Lawyers like Franks (and Franks) make the misleading claim that these vouchers would have taken money out of public education.
Let’s see how badly misleading this is.
In fact, the savings would have been huge.
It costs about $12,000 each year to “educate” each student in Chicago Public Schools.
The legislation would have given each family only $3,717, if the parents elected for a student to leave the worst Chicago schools.
That would be a savings of over $8,000 for each student who left.
Keep in mind that only students at the worst schools would have been eligible for the vouchers.
Conceivably this could have resulted in a net savings of about $240 million dollars ($8,000 times 30,000 students).
My guess is the savings could have been even larger if thousands decided to leave and the Chicago Public Schools abandoned empty schools and rented them to private replacement schools. Replacement janitors and other tradesmen would not necessarily have been unionized and certainly would not have had the same restrictive work rules.
When you a liberal like Jack Franks, turning down a savings of $240 million is simply handled by lawyerly claiming he is “fiscally conservative” while campaigning.
The political calculation is that if you say something loud enough and often enough the people who aren’t informed about any of this will actually believe whatever is said.
This is after getting past Franks’ callously turning his back on kids in the worst Chicago public schools and saying they can’t get a chance at a decent education. It’s a good example of how liberal politics practiced by Democrat insider Franks is callous, not compassionate.
A savings of $240 million would have been huge for education and public schools in Illinois.
The teachers unions and Franks couldn’t care about such a savings if it might mean some potential loss in union dues because it might result in fewer dues paying teachers.
The vouchers program in the D.C. public schools has been a huge success for the students who left those public schools.
Jack Franks’ automatic voting for what teacher unions want has given John O’Neill a variety of issues to bring to voters:
- It gives O’Neill a chance to inform voters how Franks irresponsibly voted against a huge savings for the State that would have given parents a chance to get their kids out of the worst schools.
- It shreds Franks’ claims of being a “reformer” or “fiscally conservative.”
If Franks runs his campaign on these labels, a majority of voters may conclude lawyer Franks’ “pants are on fire,” as his re-election bid goes down in flames to Republican John O’Neill.
As some point Franks risks being seen as being nothing more than an untruthful, lawyer Democrat insider politician.
On the other hand, Franks’ wanting Blago elected Governor may mean Franks is comfortable with these values.