Reids decision to abolish the filibuster is tactical. I mean is that an example, the example of direct democracy youre talking about . It wouldnt be an example of direct democracy because it concludes the debate and discussion. That was the whole purpose of the filibuster and is deeply anticonstitutional, deeply deeply anticonstitutional not in a literal sense that the structural sense of the spirit of the constitution. One question over here. Go ahead and then we will go over here. You have been talking some about the writers of the time and these writers as a whole lost generation of the 20s used to be the biggest writers. When i was in school they were the people we would read rumi took american literature. Now largely gone. What you think that is . First of all no one reads american literature. They are reading theory. Academia as we knew it and i assume you are roughly my age, your 30s. [laughter] people dont read it because in part people in college dont read it. I taught for many years at cooper union. Its a very small school. Everyone is on full scholarship because the top 2 of american colleges. One of the reasons i retired was my students did not read anymore. It was pointless. How can you talk about anything when they have no vocabulary . They were good kids, hardworking nice kids but its not just not reading american literature. Theyre not reading anything. As for these writers, through the 1970s and 80s i would say they were at the very top of peoples list. You have to read f. Scott fitzgerald. You couldnt be considered a College Graduate but what is considered a College Graduate now is not much. Eight question up here. Hi. I was wondering how you talk about liberalism the way he described it in the Democratic Party as a whole. Its kind of hard if you project contempt for the middle class and bourgeois values and it seems to me that in the past century like truman and humphrey and kennedy fitting this profile. Think about truman for a minute. Truman was an oldfashioned of that. He belonged to every known club in his hometown of missouri. He was a back slapper. Arthur schlesinger despised harry truman. John Kenneth Galbraith despised harry truman. They wanted him off the ticket in 1948. They hope to induce eisenhower to run even though they had no idea whatsoever what eisenhower represented that he was in truman. Truman was too much of a normal guy. But what they liked about kennedy now think about it, kennedys father joe kennedy had not been a very pleasant guy during world war ii. Robert kennedy worked for joe mccarthy so what was so appealing about this . Willows appealing about this guy was he was not ordinary. He came out of the middle classes and represented something of elevating american tastes. The big change is the addition of publicsector unionism. Liberalism as we once knew it as an electoral force collapsed with the tromping of mcgovernism and then reagans, reagan and the republicans three electoral victories but liberalism reconstructs itself in the 1990s when labor reconstructs itself around publicsector unionism. That is why i say what happened in newark as an expression of this trend. Andy stern the guy who created the force for what it is said and i making the look said a quite correctly that essay used singly the most powerful warsh United States. He is right and we will have to deal with this into the future. Please join me in thanking fred siegel. [applause] fred will be signing books outside and for cspan audience. Thank you. Thank you. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] the teachers that are trying to close the gap are dealing with such a hard problem. After reading the book i write a disclaimer that says this is making the assumption that no one is going to fix anything outside of the school. No one is going to do anything about the poverty of the racism or anything. Can you close the gap and put all of the burden on the teachers and the principals . They are not getting that message. That is not the message from the schools. The school is like you have an innercity africanamerican kid and a white suburban kid in second grade they can be at the same level in june when they graduate and when they come back in september the white suburban kid has gained one month of learning from the experience he has had in the innercity africanamerican kid has lost three months of learning so they are now four months apart in september. The teachers again have different burden so its not that they are getting a bad education. Its that the issues those teachers are facing are very different than the white suburban teachers are facing. That kid is ahead of the teachers going to teach them. This kid that is three months behind us to do the second great stuff all over again while trying to get her thirdgrade stuff so you can see how its a different challenge. What we are talking about is outside the school. I did not find in the research that the problem was what you were insinuating that they were getting the wrong message in the school is what happens when they leave that school until the next morning when they come home. You talked about the bad teacher the roadblock teacher. What is that . What we are talking about there is when you look at the number one thing when you look at the research a great teacher the one in the top 20th percentile if you get give for Great Teachers in a row that teacher alone can close the gap. Those teachers alone so it was possible for everyone in the country to be taught by the top 20 thats all you have to do. Thats how powerful they are. The very bottom group, the bottom two or 3 which in the book are causing so much poll, so much damage, so much loss that three or four good teachers cant overcome hitting one of those teachers so that. How does that were . The rule of four is say lets just say in the 60s or centile teacher above average teacher they are gaining a little bit. For in a row if by chance you got foreigner wrote the 60 percentile teachers you are gaining but the damage done by the twothirds as you are losing in and higher grade with that one teacher so that is what im referring to. I do want to clarify one thing. When you look at all the data and you look at the things the book says these are the things that you find that will close the gap. Everyone goes through this thing. Fire the teachers, fire the teachers. If you said to me you can only do one thing, thats not the thing i would do. If you said you can only do two things thats two things that up at the reacher says to do. You can do three things that still not the thing you should do. Everybodys attention is always on that and thats not what the Research Says is the thing that is pulling everything down. You brought it up so you are provocative, you are provocative. Hispanic resurgence in the United States. The program is about an hour. Of host the felipe, thank you for being with us. Guest thank you for taking an interest in my book. Host we can start by talking about the population of hispanics in the United States. In 1980 there were about 15 million hispanics in the United States and by 2012, nearly 53 million, and by 2020 we expect 128 million hispanics in the United States. Your book helps to give the foundation and explain how this population arrived in th
comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.