Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Shoot1st who wrote (188534)	12/4/2006 4:40:23 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793957

I agree with you in principle, that people will do better when they are given rewards that they work towards and earn. I worked under a system where awards were dealt out based on whether your supervisor believed in awards or not. Lots of awards got passed out, but they had little or nothing to do with how people performed. I would rather have my supervisor tell me I did a good job than give me a cash award, unless that cash award was something that I worked towards and earned. I got lots of awards, but after the fact. I would have preferred an attaboy, and have the ability to work towards a cash reward.

To: Shoot1st who wrote (188534)	12/4/2006 8:42:53 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 793957

The Supreme Court is considering this racial quota case. High-court justices grill Seattle schools lawyer on district's "racial tie-breaker" [KLP Note: Interesting to see liberal Seattle Times view of this~~~maybe other papers will have a better. or less biased, view...] By Mark Sherman The Associated Press seattletimes.nwsource.com WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court today wrestled with voluntary integration plans in public schools, asking whether Seattle's "Open Choice" program is an acceptable move toward student diversity or another name for illegal racial quotas. At the start of two hours of argument, the justices referred repeatedly to a 2003 Supreme Court ruling that permitted the limited consideration of race to attain a diverse student body on the college level. Does Seattle's program go too far in assigning some students to schools they didn't request? the justices wanted to know in questioning lawyers for the school district, the Bush administration and white parents whose children were assigned to high schools with heavy minority enrollment. Justice Anthony Kennedy was among those expressing deep skepticism about Seattle's program. The district seems to be telling its students that "everybody can get a meal," but that only certain people can get "dessert," Kennedy said. Justice Antonin Scalia said it was as though the district was saying "you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs." The justices were referring to the fact that some students have been assigned based on their race to schools they didn't ask to attend. The question, said Kennedy, is whether a student can get into the school the student really prefers. Chief Justice John Roberts expressed concern about making school assignments "based on skin color" and not "any other factor." Attorney Michael Madden, representing the school district, said race is but one factor, that it is relied on only in some instances and then only at the end of a lengthy process. Madden drew a distinction between the Seattle school program and the subject of the court's 2003 decision, which narrowly approved the University of Michigan law school affirmative action admissions program. "This is not like being denied admission to a state's flagship university," Madden told Roberts. The Seattle students are "not being denied admission, they are being redistributed." Parents in Louisville, Ky., and Seattle are challenging school assignment plans that factor in a student's race in an effort to have individual school populations approximate the racial makeup of the entire system. Federal appeals courts have upheld both programs. Amid the oral arguments, pro-affirmative action demonstrators bearing "Fight For Equality" placards marched on the sidewalk in front of the Supreme Court in a brisk wind. A parent-teachers group from Chicago and several civil rights groups were among those sponsoring the demonstration. Demonstrators chanted "Equal education, not segregation" and "We won't go to the back of the bus, integration is a must." Some held signs that read "Stop racism now." Among the crowd were representatives of the National Organization for Women, the NAACP and students from Howard University. Though outnumbered, there were some in the crowd from the other side. "Regardless of how well-motivated, allowing the state to engineer racial mixing only creates racial stereotypes and increases racial tension," said Terry Pell, president of the Center for Individual Rights, a public interest law firm. "The court needs to put an end to state-mandated tinkering with race." The school policies in contention are designed to keep schools from segregating along the same lines as neighborhoods. In Seattle, only high school students are affected. Louisville's plan applies systemwide. "The plan has prevented the resegregation that inevitably would result from the community's segregated housing patterns and that most likely would produce many schools that might be perceived as 'failing,'" the Seattle school district said in its brief to the high court. The Bush administration has taken the side of the parents who are suing the school districts, much as it intervened on behalf of college and graduate students who challenged affirmative action policies before the Supreme Court in 2003. In 2003, the court upheld race-conscious admissions in higher education in a 5-4 opinion by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The cases are Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District No. 1, 05-908; and Meredith v. Jefferson County Board of Education, 05-915. Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company