Proud Member of The Moms Clean Air Force
Print This Post
Sep
23
Follow-up: US Solicitor Gen. says Ohio parents can represent kids in court; SCOTUS likely to hear case
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
Last May, I wrote about a set of Ohio parents – the Woods – who sought redress in the courts in order to compel a school district to provide certain services to their autistic child under the IDEA‘s IEP process. (The Plain Dealer published an article, then a letter to the editor and then another article within a week about how the Cleveland Bar Association wanted to levy fines against a different family for the unauthorized practice of law, because the parents had represented their autistic minor child in a court against a school district, as they tried to get the child’s needs met by the district. The Bar dropped that effort and more or less apologized, recognizing that it was the wrong approach.)
Today, the PD published this article that indicates support from the U.S. Solicitor General’s office, which provided an opinion to the Supreme Court of the US, for such parents to represent their minor children in such cases. SCOTUS had withheld deciding on whether to hear the case until the Solicitor’s office submitted its opinion.
The SCOTUSblog wrote about this development on Wednesday, four days ago. It provides this link to the Solicitor’s brief. How cool is that. It also provides links to numerous other important filings in the case.
From the PD article:
Lawyers for the federal government are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to let a Parma couple represent their autistic son in court to improve his education — a move that would open doors for parents of other disabled children.
Jeff and Sandee Winkelman asked the court last fall to overrule a federal appeals court ruling that only a lawyer could argue a case on behalf of their 9-year-old son, Jacob.
Appeals courts around the country disagree on whether parents have that right.
The Supreme Court held off deciding whether to hear the case until the U.S. solicitor general, the official lawyer for the federal government, could weigh in on the issue.
On Wednesday, the solicitor general’s office resoundingly backed the Winkelmans, asking the court to hear the case and to rule in the Winkelmans’ favor.
Special education laws so intertwine the interests of parents and children that separating them would be contrary to the law, the court filing said.
“Denial of a free appropriate public education adversely affects not just the child with a disability but also his or her family,” the brief states.
Jean-Claude Andre, the California lawyer who volunteered to help the family on the Supreme Court appeal, said he was ecstatic and thinks the court will likely hear the case, perhaps as soon as February or March.
“Now we just have to get five justices to agree with this,” Andre said.
I agree that the likelihood that SCOTUS will hear the case is very high. I also believe that it should side with the Solicitor and allow parents to represent their minor children with disabilities.
In cases involving enforcement of IDEA provisions, the parents have almost always already spent months if not years working through the administrative hearing process, during which time they become intimately familiar not just with their child’s needs as the law sees them, but with the law itself. What a ridiculous financial burden for them to then have to switch to paid legal counsel in order to enforce or continue to fight for rights. If there’s a question of incompetence on the part of the parents, that’s one thing. But in these cases, that’s not been the scenario.
Sadly, the Winkelmans and the Parma School District continue to argue over who should pay for the child’s education.
Though Sandee Winkelman said she was delighted to have the solicitor’s support, she noted that she is still fighting with the district over where Jacob will attend school this year. The parents want the district to pay for a private school, while the district wants to teach the child in-house.
Christina Peer, the Parma schools’ lawyer, said she is still studying the filing but expects the court to hear the case.
Of course, I have to ask: why didn’t the Cleveland paper of record not run this story until today? Guess there was just so much other news. At least there were only two articles in six days rather than four in five about everyone’s favorite unelected candidate for common pleas court. So I can’t blame it on that. Or her.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:03 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
23
Yo, Blackwell, Strickland: How to help give more Ohio kids an Ohio college education
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
It doesn’t look like Ohio has a site like this, which, according to this article, about 35 states already have. All I could find was this and this.
What am I talking about??
The trend of one-stop college Web sites began in California in 1996 when the 23-campus California State University system saw a need to fill in the gap left by a shortage of college counselors in high schools. Allison Jones, assistant vice chancellor of academic affairs for the Cal State system, said csumentor.edu cut down on the red tape involved in applying to college and reduced the amount of paper required to admit students.
CSU now only prints 100,000 applications, compared with the several million before the Web site. Close to 98 percent of the 500,000 applications received are through the site, he said.
California also has developed a statewide site called californiacolleges.edu that gives a comprehensive look at all the colleges in the state rather just one system.
Liz Dietz, CEO of the Xap Corp., which has created many of the sites across the country, said they are especially popular in the South where states are trying to revive their economies.
“It speaks to a change in economics, moving from agrarian or manufacturing to knowledge based,” Dietz said. “Those high-paying agricultural and manufacturing jobs just don’t exist any more.”
Think of those savings! Think of the increase in kids who’ll attend!
Think about not needing slot machines!
So, how about proposing it?
Better yet, how about the state legislature or the Board of Regents just getting it done?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:56 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Sep
23
Why, even as a Jew who loves Israel, I won’t vote Republican, or for Josh Mandel
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
I crossed paths with this blog and blogger last year on the now defunct Democracy Guy. Some posts on DG that I considered insensitive to the disengagement in Gaza had drawn fire from the blogger and I researched her a bit, then emailed her. We developed a rapport and I continue to look to her blog, particularly when I’m in need of getting a grip on what I should be thinking about regarding the Middle East. We frequently don’t agree, but learning about and from her perspective has been eye-opening.
In this excellent post, Lynn reveals that she voted for a Republican for president for the first time in 2004, for Bush because she felt that, “in order to protect our civil liberties, we must first and foremost remain a free country, and that means that we must first win the war against the Islamist threat, both here and abroad. I believed that then and I believe it today.”
And now? She, who lives in PA, continues,
But there are limits.
Rick Santorum’s America is not my America. It’s not an America I want to live in. If this race were happening in some other state, I could sit back and bite my nails and try not to worry about how I would vote. I don’t have that luxury. Santorum gets the real threat to this country. He’s a staunch supporter of Israel, and he understands the dynamics of the Middle East better than most of his colleagues in Congress. But when it comes down to the nitty gritty, to what this country, the US of A, is all about, he doesn’t have a clue.
Lynn goes on to juxtapose the strengths she sees in Santorum’s positions, and the incontrovertible truths (my words, not hers) of the threats to us in his positions.
She concludes,
Bob Casey is not the right choice for Pennsylvania. But there is a worse choice and, unfortunately, that worse choice is Casey’s opponent, the incumbent junior senator who, if elected, is projected to become the second most powerful Republican in Congress. Those of us who have lost faith in the Democratic party, who are seeking leadership elsewhere, can’t possibly sit by and allow the fanatical right wing fringe to take over the GOP just as the fanatical left wing fringe is attempting to take over the party of Roosevelt and JFK. The Democrats need more Caseys, if only to pull the party back from the brink, back towards the center. And the last thing the Republican party — or America — needs is Rick Santorum serving another six year term.
Yeah, I know that he’s blanketing Pajamas Media with his ads. And that he’s speaking in all the right places and saying what we, would go to the mat for Israel, want to hear. I know that many of us aren’t willing or able to see past that because it’s just too important. I get that. But I can’t do it. Baring totally unforeseen circumstances, he’s not getting my vote.
The effect of reading what she’s written is that I can now not vote for Josh Mandel with much more ease, even though he is a Jew running as a Republican to represent my Ohio House District, 17.
I rarely vote for Republicans as it is. And Josh is in fact a nice, Jewish boy. He is in fact a VERY nice Jewish boy. I enjoyed spending a couple of hours with him last June. I voiced my reservations about him to him then. He was cordial and we had a nice discussion.
But, as Lynn writes, barring totally unforeseen circumstances, he’s not getting my vote.
No, he hasn’t professed anything like Santorum. But worse, he hasn’t actually professed much at all. I know he’s been to law school and so have I. And so I’m sure he’ll understand how I see that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I must believe that, as a candidate running as a Republican, he supports what the Ohio Republican’s support.
Now, I’ve written in other places about how I wish to God that Josh would just say it – say he won’t vote for Blackwell, say that he doesn’t support x, y and z extreme positions often proffered by the Ohio GOP. The power he could wield on behalf of moderate Republicans could really turn things around so that that party isn’t becoming so fragmented and dysfunctional. I don’t want to live in a one-party state or country, no matter which party we’re talking about.
But, I’ve not yet read that Josh is doing this. There’s still 45 days left. And it’s the New Year and Yom Kippur next week. Maybe, maybe, Josh will think about these kinds of issues. How he could be a trailblazer, help bring his party back from the brink, get Ohio back to sanity and integrity and bipartisanship accomplishment in the state legislature.
Because, think about it – if nothing else, Josh’s seeming reticence may very well indicate just how centrist he is. This is a moment for him to distinguish himself that way, as a choice moderate Republicans can feel good about. I can’t say that watching step out from the placid, kind persona we see visually will for sure change my vote. But I sure would have a new sense of respect for him. And that’s capital for the next time, for sure.
What would really be lousy is if I had to choose between a Democrat who wants to dismantle Israel and a Republican who wants to ban abortion in all circumstances. Tomorrow, in shul? I think I’ll be praying that I may never have to make such a choice.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:53 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
23
In a surprise move yesterday, the Ohio State University Board of Trustees came out in strong opposition to the Learn and Earn issue on November’s ballot that would allow casino and slot gambling in Ohio.
“If we are silent it implies we support it because we could benefit from it,” said trustee Les Wexner, Limited Brands founder. “I think it’s very clever — and bad public policy.”
…
Trustee Robert H. Schottenstein agreed, saying Issue 3 “doesn’t smell right, feel right or seem fair” and sounds too good to be true.
“We do not think this is good for the state of Ohio,” said Schottenstein.
You bet your sweet bippee.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:57 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | 6 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
23
What Do Jews Do on…Rosh Hashana, 2006 Edition
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
Last year was my first year of blogging. For Rosh Hashana (going from 5765 to 5766), I wrote these entries:
This year, as I enter 5767, isn’t all that different. I managed to control how much food I made last night so that I didn’t throw much away. Matzoh ball soup for lunch today was as good as last night for dinner, likewise the homemade mac and cheese and I turned the leftover chicken into chicken salad, which my husband paired with some herring in wine sauce and sour cream. I indulged in a piece of apple pie with some french vanilla ice cream just a short while ago and now, my kids are all playing quietly while the SO naps and I’m sitting here with the newspaper open, half read, catching up on blogosphere happenings.
In our lives, what’s different? A lot can happen in twelve months, qualititatively as well as quantitatively. And I guess I’m feeling happy that I notice that. Because, as the Rabbi said today in his very good sermon, based on the notions behind the movie, Click, this is the only time we have and we need to tend to the balls we’re juggling in our hands and in the air now, and not place a higher priority on the one’s we think we want or that worry us though they have yet to enter our lives.
The siddur used for the high holy days is different than the one used for Shabbat and includes numerous prayers in Hebrew and English. Here’s one that I found particularly relevant.
From the Musaf portion of the service:
***
Each of us is an author
“You open the Book of Remembrance, and it speaks for itself,
For each of us has signed it with deeds.”
This is the sobering truth,
Which both frightens and consoles us:
Each of us is an author,
Writing, with deeds, in life’s Great Book.
And to each You have given the power
To write lines that will never be lost.
No song is so trivial,
No story is so commonplace,
No deed is so insignificant,
That You do not record it.
No kindness is ever done in vain;
Each mean act leaves its imprint;
All our deeds, the good and the bad,
Are noted and remembered by You.
So help us to remember always
That what we do will live forever;
That the echoes of the words we speak
Will resound until the end of time.
May our lives reflect this awareness;
May our deeds bring no shame or reproach.
May the entries we make in the Book of Remembrance
Be ever acceptable to You.
*** [itals in the original]
I believe that contemplations like this having meaning whether or not you believe in a god or religion. Because the book of remembrances is the same idea as your deeds and words being etched in any memory – your own, those who observe you, those for whom you act, those against whom you act, those who read about you, those you want to vote for you, those you serve.
No kindness is done in vain and each mean act leaves its imprint. No deed is insignificant that isn’t recorded.
I’ve always believed that, even though I’ve never been sure if I believe in God or a god.
And to be reminded about this concept during services this morning was a lovely thing.
Good shabbos and Yom Tov, L’shana tovah.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:11 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
23
Follow-up: US Solicitor Gen. says Ohio parents can represent kids in court; SCOTUS likely to hear case
Filed Under Politics | 2 Comments
Last May, I wrote about a set of Ohio parents – the Woods – who sought redress in the courts in order to compel a school district to provide certain services to their autistic child under the IDEA‘s IEP process. (The Plain Dealer published an article, then a letter to the editor and then another article within a week about how the Cleveland Bar Association wanted to levy fines against a different family for the unauthorized practice of law, because the parents had represented their autistic minor child in a court against a school district, as they tried to get the child’s needs met by the district. The Bar dropped that effort and more or less apologized, recognizing that it was the wrong approach.)
Today, the PD published this article that indicates support from the U.S. Solicitor General’s office, which provided an opinion to the Supreme Court of the US, for such parents to represent their minor children in such cases. SCOTUS had withheld deciding on whether to hear the case until the Solicitor’s office submitted its opinion.
The SCOTUSblog wrote about this development on Wednesday, four days ago. It provides this link to the Solicitor’s brief. How cool is that. It also provides links to numerous other important filings in the case.
From the PD article:
Lawyers for the federal government are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to let a Parma couple represent their autistic son in court to improve his education — a move that would open doors for parents of other disabled children.
Jeff and Sandee Winkelman asked the court last fall to overrule a federal appeals court ruling that only a lawyer could argue a case on behalf of their 9-year-old son, Jacob.
Appeals courts around the country disagree on whether parents have that right.
The Supreme Court held off deciding whether to hear the case until the U.S. solicitor general, the official lawyer for the federal government, could weigh in on the issue.
On Wednesday, the solicitor general’s office resoundingly backed the Winkelmans, asking the court to hear the case and to rule in the Winkelmans’ favor.
Special education laws so intertwine the interests of parents and children that separating them would be contrary to the law, the court filing said.
“Denial of a free appropriate public education adversely affects not just the child with a disability but also his or her family,” the brief states.
Jean-Claude Andre, the California lawyer who volunteered to help the family on the Supreme Court appeal, said he was ecstatic and thinks the court will likely hear the case, perhaps as soon as February or March.
“Now we just have to get five justices to agree with this,” Andre said.
I agree that the likelihood that SCOTUS will hear the case is very high. I also believe that it should side with the Solicitor and allow parents to represent their minor children with disabilities.
In cases involving enforcement of IDEA provisions, the parents have almost always already spent months if not years working through the administrative hearing process, during which time they become intimately familiar not just with their child’s needs as the law sees them, but with the law itself. What a ridiculous financial burden for them to then have to switch to paid legal counsel in order to enforce or continue to fight for rights. If there’s a question of incompetence on the part of the parents, that’s one thing. But in these cases, that’s not been the scenario.
Sadly, the Winkelmans and the Parma School District continue to argue over who should pay for the child’s education.
Though Sandee Winkelman said she was delighted to have the solicitor’s support, she noted that she is still fighting with the district over where Jacob will attend school this year. The parents want the district to pay for a private school, while the district wants to teach the child in-house.
Christina Peer, the Parma schools’ lawyer, said she is still studying the filing but expects the court to hear the case.
Of course, I have to ask: why didn’t the Cleveland paper of record not run this story until today? Guess there was just so much other news. At least there were only two articles in six days rather than four in five about everyone’s favorite unelected candidate for common pleas court. So I can’t blame it on that. Or her.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:03 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | 2 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
23
Yo, Blackwell, Strickland: How to help give more Ohio kids an Ohio college education
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
It doesn’t look like Ohio has a site like this, which, according to this article, about 35 states already have. All I could find was this and this.
What am I talking about??
The trend of one-stop college Web sites began in California in 1996 when the 23-campus California State University system saw a need to fill in the gap left by a shortage of college counselors in high schools. Allison Jones, assistant vice chancellor of academic affairs for the Cal State system, said csumentor.edu cut down on the red tape involved in applying to college and reduced the amount of paper required to admit students.
CSU now only prints 100,000 applications, compared with the several million before the Web site. Close to 98 percent of the 500,000 applications received are through the site, he said.
California also has developed a statewide site called californiacolleges.edu that gives a comprehensive look at all the colleges in the state rather just one system.
Liz Dietz, CEO of the Xap Corp., which has created many of the sites across the country, said they are especially popular in the South where states are trying to revive their economies.
“It speaks to a change in economics, moving from agrarian or manufacturing to knowledge based,” Dietz said. “Those high-paying agricultural and manufacturing jobs just don’t exist any more.”
Think of those savings! Think of the increase in kids who’ll attend!
Think about not needing slot machines!
So, how about proposing it?
Better yet, how about the state legislature or the Board of Regents just getting it done?
By Jill Miller Zimon at 6:56 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Sep
23
Why, even as a Jew who loves Israel, I won’t vote Republican, or for Josh Mandel
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
I crossed paths with this blog and blogger last year on the now defunct Democracy Guy. Some posts on DG that I considered insensitive to the disengagement in Gaza had drawn fire from the blogger and I researched her a bit, then emailed her. We developed a rapport and I continue to look to her blog, particularly when I’m in need of getting a grip on what I should be thinking about regarding the Middle East. We frequently don’t agree, but learning about and from her perspective has been eye-opening.
In this excellent post, Lynn reveals that she voted for a Republican for president for the first time in 2004, for Bush because she felt that, “in order to protect our civil liberties, we must first and foremost remain a free country, and that means that we must first win the war against the Islamist threat, both here and abroad. I believed that then and I believe it today.”
And now? She, who lives in PA, continues,
But there are limits.
Rick Santorum’s America is not my America. It’s not an America I want to live in. If this race were happening in some other state, I could sit back and bite my nails and try not to worry about how I would vote. I don’t have that luxury. Santorum gets the real threat to this country. He’s a staunch supporter of Israel, and he understands the dynamics of the Middle East better than most of his colleagues in Congress. But when it comes down to the nitty gritty, to what this country, the US of A, is all about, he doesn’t have a clue.
Lynn goes on to juxtapose the strengths she sees in Santorum’s positions, and the incontrovertible truths (my words, not hers) of the threats to us in his positions.
She concludes,
Bob Casey is not the right choice for Pennsylvania. But there is a worse choice and, unfortunately, that worse choice is Casey’s opponent, the incumbent junior senator who, if elected, is projected to become the second most powerful Republican in Congress. Those of us who have lost faith in the Democratic party, who are seeking leadership elsewhere, can’t possibly sit by and allow the fanatical right wing fringe to take over the GOP just as the fanatical left wing fringe is attempting to take over the party of Roosevelt and JFK. The Democrats need more Caseys, if only to pull the party back from the brink, back towards the center. And the last thing the Republican party — or America — needs is Rick Santorum serving another six year term.
Yeah, I know that he’s blanketing Pajamas Media with his ads. And that he’s speaking in all the right places and saying what we, would go to the mat for Israel, want to hear. I know that many of us aren’t willing or able to see past that because it’s just too important. I get that. But I can’t do it. Baring totally unforeseen circumstances, he’s not getting my vote.
The effect of reading what she’s written is that I can now not vote for Josh Mandel with much more ease, even though he is a Jew running as a Republican to represent my Ohio House District, 17.
I rarely vote for Republicans as it is. And Josh is in fact a nice, Jewish boy. He is in fact a VERY nice Jewish boy. I enjoyed spending a couple of hours with him last June. I voiced my reservations about him to him then. He was cordial and we had a nice discussion.
But, as Lynn writes, barring totally unforeseen circumstances, he’s not getting my vote.
No, he hasn’t professed anything like Santorum. But worse, he hasn’t actually professed much at all. I know he’s been to law school and so have I. And so I’m sure he’ll understand how I see that, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I must believe that, as a candidate running as a Republican, he supports what the Ohio Republican’s support.
Now, I’ve written in other places about how I wish to God that Josh would just say it – say he won’t vote for Blackwell, say that he doesn’t support x, y and z extreme positions often proffered by the Ohio GOP. The power he could wield on behalf of moderate Republicans could really turn things around so that that party isn’t becoming so fragmented and dysfunctional. I don’t want to live in a one-party state or country, no matter which party we’re talking about.
But, I’ve not yet read that Josh is doing this. There’s still 45 days left. And it’s the New Year and Yom Kippur next week. Maybe, maybe, Josh will think about these kinds of issues. How he could be a trailblazer, help bring his party back from the brink, get Ohio back to sanity and integrity and bipartisanship accomplishment in the state legislature.
Because, think about it – if nothing else, Josh’s seeming reticence may very well indicate just how centrist he is. This is a moment for him to distinguish himself that way, as a choice moderate Republicans can feel good about. I can’t say that watching step out from the placid, kind persona we see visually will for sure change my vote. But I sure would have a new sense of respect for him. And that’s capital for the next time, for sure.
What would really be lousy is if I had to choose between a Democrat who wants to dismantle Israel and a Republican who wants to ban abortion in all circumstances. Tomorrow, in shul? I think I’ll be praying that I may never have to make such a choice.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:53 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Sep
23
Follow-up: US Solicitor Gen. says Ohio parents can represent kids in court; SCOTUS likely to hear case
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Last May, I wrote about a set of Ohio parents – the Woods – who sought redress in the courts in order to compel a school district to provide certain services to their autistic child under the IDEA‘s IEP process. (The Plain Dealer published an article, then a letter to the editor and then another article within a week about how the Cleveland Bar Association wanted to levy fines against a different family for the unauthorized practice of law, because the parents had represented their autistic minor child in a court against a school district, as they tried to get the child’s needs met by the district. The Bar dropped that effort and more or less apologized, recognizing that it was the wrong approach.)
Today, the PD published this article that indicates support from the U.S. Solicitor General’s office, which provided an opinion to the Supreme Court of the US, for such parents to represent their minor children in such cases. SCOTUS had withheld deciding on whether to hear the case until the Solicitor’s office submitted its opinion.
The SCOTUSblog wrote about this development on Wednesday, four days ago. It provides this link to the Solicitor’s brief. How cool is that. It also provides links to numerous other important filings in the case.
From the PD article:
Lawyers for the federal government are urging the U.S. Supreme Court to let a Parma couple represent their autistic son in court to improve his education — a move that would open doors for parents of other disabled children.
Jeff and Sandee Winkelman asked the court last fall to overrule a federal appeals court ruling that only a lawyer could argue a case on behalf of their 9-year-old son, Jacob.
Appeals courts around the country disagree on whether parents have that right.
The Supreme Court held off deciding whether to hear the case until the U.S. solicitor general, the official lawyer for the federal government, could weigh in on the issue.
On Wednesday, the solicitor general’s office resoundingly backed the Winkelmans, asking the court to hear the case and to rule in the Winkelmans’ favor.
Special education laws so intertwine the interests of parents and children that separating them would be contrary to the law, the court filing said.
“Denial of a free appropriate public education adversely affects not just the child with a disability but also his or her family,” the brief states.
Jean-Claude Andre, the California lawyer who volunteered to help the family on the Supreme Court appeal, said he was ecstatic and thinks the court will likely hear the case, perhaps as soon as February or March.
“Now we just have to get five justices to agree with this,” Andre said.
I agree that the likelihood that SCOTUS will hear the case is very high. I also believe that it should side with the Solicitor and allow parents to represent their minor children with disabilities.
In cases involving enforcement of IDEA provisions, the parents have almost always already spent months if not years working through the administrative hearing process, during which time they become intimately familiar not just with their child’s needs as the law sees them, but with the law itself. What a ridiculous financial burden for them to then have to switch to paid legal counsel in order to enforce or continue to fight for rights. If there’s a question of incompetence on the part of the parents, that’s one thing. But in these cases, that’s not been the scenario.
Sadly, the Winkelmans and the Parma School District continue to argue over who should pay for the child’s education.
Though Sandee Winkelman said she was delighted to have the solicitor’s support, she noted that she is still fighting with the district over where Jacob will attend school this year. The parents want the district to pay for a private school, while the district wants to teach the child in-house.
Christina Peer, the Parma schools’ lawyer, said she is still studying the filing but expects the court to hear the case.
Of course, I have to ask: why didn’t the Cleveland paper of record not run this story until today? Guess there was just so much other news. At least there were only two articles in six days rather than four in five about everyone’s favorite unelected candidate for common pleas court. So I can’t blame it on that. Or her.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 4:03 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Sep
23
In a surprise move yesterday, the Ohio State University Board of Trustees came out in strong opposition to the Learn and Earn issue on November’s ballot that would allow casino and slot gambling in Ohio.
“If we are silent it implies we support it because we could benefit from it,” said trustee Les Wexner, Limited Brands founder. “I think it’s very clever — and bad public policy.”
…
Trustee Robert H. Schottenstein agreed, saying Issue 3 “doesn’t smell right, feel right or seem fair” and sounds too good to be true.
“We do not think this is good for the state of Ohio,” said Schottenstein.
You bet your sweet bippee.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:57 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | 6 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
23
What Do Jews Do on…Rosh Hashana, 2006 Edition
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Last year was my first year of blogging. For Rosh Hashana (going from 5765 to 5766), I wrote these entries:
This year, as I enter 5767, isn’t all that different. I managed to control how much food I made last night so that I didn’t throw much away. Matzoh ball soup for lunch today was as good as last night for dinner, likewise the homemade mac and cheese and I turned the leftover chicken into chicken salad, which my husband paired with some herring in wine sauce and sour cream. I indulged in a piece of apple pie with some french vanilla ice cream just a short while ago and now, my kids are all playing quietly while the SO naps and I’m sitting here with the newspaper open, half read, catching up on blogosphere happenings.
In our lives, what’s different? A lot can happen in twelve months, qualititatively as well as quantitatively. And I guess I’m feeling happy that I notice that. Because, as the Rabbi said today in his very good sermon, based on the notions behind the movie, Click, this is the only time we have and we need to tend to the balls we’re juggling in our hands and in the air now, and not place a higher priority on the one’s we think we want or that worry us though they have yet to enter our lives.
The siddur used for the high holy days is different than the one used for Shabbat and includes numerous prayers in Hebrew and English. Here’s one that I found particularly relevant.
From the Musaf portion of the service:
***
Each of us is an author
“You open the Book of Remembrance, and it speaks for itself,
For each of us has signed it with deeds.”
This is the sobering truth,
Which both frightens and consoles us:
Each of us is an author,
Writing, with deeds, in life’s Great Book.
And to each You have given the power
To write lines that will never be lost.
No song is so trivial,
No story is so commonplace,
No deed is so insignificant,
That You do not record it.
No kindness is ever done in vain;
Each mean act leaves its imprint;
All our deeds, the good and the bad,
Are noted and remembered by You.
So help us to remember always
That what we do will live forever;
That the echoes of the words we speak
Will resound until the end of time.
May our lives reflect this awareness;
May our deeds bring no shame or reproach.
May the entries we make in the Book of Remembrance
Be ever acceptable to You.
*** [itals in the original]
I believe that contemplations like this having meaning whether or not you believe in a god or religion. Because the book of remembrances is the same idea as your deeds and words being etched in any memory – your own, those who observe you, those for whom you act, those against whom you act, those who read about you, those you want to vote for you, those you serve.
No kindness is done in vain and each mean act leaves its imprint. No deed is insignificant that isn’t recorded.
I’ve always believed that, even though I’ve never been sure if I believe in God or a god.
And to be reminded about this concept during services this morning was a lovely thing.
Good shabbos and Yom Tov, L’shana tovah.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 3:11 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Sep
23
OSU Board of Trustees: NO on Ohio Learn and Earn
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
In a surprise move yesterday, the Ohio State University Board of Trustees came out in strong opposition to the Learn and Earn issue on November’s ballot that would allow casino and slot gambling in Ohio.
“If we are silent it implies we support it because we could benefit from it,” said trustee Les Wexner, Limited Brands founder. “I think it’s very clever — and bad public policy.”
…
Trustee Robert H. Schottenstein agreed, saying Issue 3 “doesn’t smell right, feel right or seem fair” and sounds too good to be true.
“We do not think this is good for the state of Ohio,” said Schottenstein.
You bet your sweet bippee.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:57 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Sep
23
Reason #46 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3
Filed Under Politics | 4 Comments
Because Judaism frowns on it. (I have to use this one today since it’s Rosh Hashana.)
If you’re not a Jew, then of course you don’t need to feel bound or persuaded by this reason. However, given that Judaism is the foundation for many monotheistic religions, including Christianity, at a minimum, it’s informative.
Thanks to someone named Glenda, a very nice rundown on Judaism’s views (yes, Judaism almost always has multiple views of the same issue) can be found here.
The most current opinion about using gambling to raise money for shuls, from the Central Conference of American Rabbis (this group represents the Reform Movement which tends to attract more assimilated, secular Jews, compared to the Conservative and Orthodox Movement, but it’s all relative), since 1979, is
The CCAR deplores the use of gambling devices to raise funds for Jewish religious and communal institutions, as being contrary to our faith and tradition. The CCAR calls upon its members to discourage such practices.
The Conservative movement “urges all members of the Rabbinical Assembly to be alert to the evils of gambling in general, and to oppose not only the more obvious problems of involvement with individuals or groups making a profession of gambling within the synagogue, but even more so, the suble and decidedly unwholesome consequences of gambling as a mainstay of synagogue fiscal management.”
As an aside, here’s an interesting background on the dreidl gambling game, affiliated with Chanuka:
Subject: Question 5.6: What are the origins of the Chanukah Dreidel?
Answer:
Both dreidel and grogger are traditional European toys, although the names they go by in non-Jewish cultures are quite different from the ones we use.
The English (and Latin) name for the dreidel is teetotum -- and you can look up its history in the Oxford English Dictionary. It turns out to be an ancient gambling toy, known in ancient Greece, and with national variations on the letters on the faces of the toy. In all national variants, the letters are a mnemonic for the rules of the game. For example, the traditional English letters are: T - Take all H - Take half N - Nothing P - Put
Although the fact that the Dreidel goes back to Greek times makes it possible that it was known in the Hashemonean kingdom, the fact that the Hebrew letters on the sides make a mnemonic that fits the pattern described above when used as initial letters of Yiddish words suggests that the dreidel entered Jewish culture through the Yiddish speaking Ashkenazi and is not of ancient origin.
The OED entry for teetotum says that that the toy fell out of use because cards were far better gambling games, and that by the 1890's, it had been reduced to a children's toy in the English speaking world.
In the Jewish world, according to Schauss's guide to Jewish Holy Days, the playing card fad of the middle ages led the rabbis issuing a series of edicts condemning excessive gambling. They didn't ban the dreidel, though, perhaps because the "A great miracle happened there" interpretation of the letters allowed the dreidel to escape their wrath.
As to the grogger, the rest of the English speaking world calls them ratchets. You can buy orchestral ratchets from the precussion section of good music supply catalogs, and in much of the world, the ratchet is an important part of the equipment you take to things like soccer matches and new-years parties.
I’m having a hard time finding a statement by the Orthodox Union about its position on gambling, but I did find this story about it in the Orthodox community. I know firsthand one Modern Orthodox family that disintegrated because of gambling. The Orthodox community’s reputation to either shun or keep quiet as to mental health-related problems is legion but even when I was at Bellefaire, many efforts existed, and I know continue to exist to address the issues.
I don’t know any of the Ratners involved in Forest City personally. I don’t know where they are this morning or where they’ll be next weekend for Yom Kippur. I don’t know if they’ve asked their clergy about their endeavors, at any point along the way. I’ve said before that I wonder, how do they square their ambitions. But that is based on how I square mine.
Find out about how your religion views gambling, in all its forms.
Then, vote no on Issue 3.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:48 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
23
What Do Jews Do on…Rosh Hashana, 2006 Edition
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Last year was my first year of blogging. For Rosh Hashana (going from 5765 to 5766), I wrote these entries:
This year, as I enter 5767, isn’t all that different. I managed to control how much food I made last night so that I didn’t throw much away. Matzoh ball soup for lunch today was as good as last night for dinner, likewise the homemade mac and cheese and I turned the leftover chicken into chicken salad, which my husband paired with some herring in wine sauce and sour cream. I indulged in a piece of apple pie with some french vanilla ice cream just a short while ago and now, my kids are all playing quietly while the SO naps and I’m sitting here with the newspaper open, half read, catching up on blogosphere happenings.
In our lives, what’s different? A lot can happen in twelve months, qualititatively as well as quantitatively. And I guess I’m feeling happy that I notice that. Because, as the Rabbi said today in his very good sermon, based on the notions behind the movie, Click, this is the only time we have and we need to tend to the balls we’re juggling in our hands and in the air now, and not place a higher priority on the one’s we think we want or that worry us though they have yet to enter our lives.
The siddur used for the high holy days is different than the one used for Shabbat and includes numerous prayers in Hebrew and English. Here’s one that I found particularly relevant.
From the Musaf portion of the service:
***
Each of us is an author
“You open the Book of Remembrance, and it speaks for itself,
For each of us has signed it with deeds.”
This is the sobering truth,
Which both frightens and consoles us:
Each of us is an author,
Writing, with deeds, in life’s Great Book.
And to each You have given the power
To write lines that will never be lost.
No song is so trivial,
No story is so commonplace,
No deed is so insignificant,
That You do not record it.
No kindness is ever done in vain;
Each mean act leaves its imprint;
All our deeds, the good and the bad,
Are noted and remembered by You.
So help us to remember always
That what we do will live forever;
That the echoes of the words we speak
Will resound until the end of time.
May our lives reflect this awareness;
May our deeds bring no shame or reproach.
May the entries we make in the Book of Remembrance
Be ever acceptable to You.
*** [itals in the original]
I believe that contemplations like this having meaning whether or not you believe in a god or religion. Because the book of remembrances is the same idea as your deeds and words being etched in any memory – your own, those who observe you, those for whom you act, those against whom you act, those who read about you, those you want to vote for you, those you serve.
No kindness is done in vain and each mean act leaves its imprint. No deed is insignificant that isn’t recorded.
I’ve always believed that, even though I’ve never been sure if I believe in God or a god.
And to be reminded about this concept during services this morning was a lovely thing.
Good shabbos and Yom Tov, L’shana tovah.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 12:11 pm September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Print This Post
Sep
23
Reason #46 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3
Filed Under Politics | 4 Comments
Because Judaism frowns on it. (I have to use this one today since it’s Rosh Hashana.)
If you’re not a Jew, then of course you don’t need to feel bound or persuaded by this reason. However, given that Judaism is the foundation for many monotheistic religions, including Christianity, at a minimum, it’s informative.
Thanks to someone named Glenda, a very nice rundown on Judaism’s views (yes, Judaism almost always has multiple views of the same issue) can be found here.
The most current opinion about using gambling to raise money for shuls, from the Central Conference of American Rabbis (this group represents the Reform Movement which tends to attract more assimilated, secular Jews, compared to the Conservative and Orthodox Movement, but it’s all relative), since 1979, is
The CCAR deplores the use of gambling devices to raise funds for Jewish religious and communal institutions, as being contrary to our faith and tradition. The CCAR calls upon its members to discourage such practices.
The Conservative movement “urges all members of the Rabbinical Assembly to be alert to the evils of gambling in general, and to oppose not only the more obvious problems of involvement with individuals or groups making a profession of gambling within the synagogue, but even more so, the suble and decidedly unwholesome consequences of gambling as a mainstay of synagogue fiscal management.”
As an aside, here’s an interesting background on the dreidl gambling game, affiliated with Chanuka:
Subject: Question 5.6: What are the origins of the Chanukah Dreidel?
Answer:
Both dreidel and grogger are traditional European toys, although the names they go by in non-Jewish cultures are quite different from the ones we use.
The English (and Latin) name for the dreidel is teetotum -- and you can look up its history in the Oxford English Dictionary. It turns out to be an ancient gambling toy, known in ancient Greece, and with national variations on the letters on the faces of the toy. In all national variants, the letters are a mnemonic for the rules of the game. For example, the traditional English letters are: T - Take all H - Take half N - Nothing P - Put
Although the fact that the Dreidel goes back to Greek times makes it possible that it was known in the Hashemonean kingdom, the fact that the Hebrew letters on the sides make a mnemonic that fits the pattern described above when used as initial letters of Yiddish words suggests that the dreidel entered Jewish culture through the Yiddish speaking Ashkenazi and is not of ancient origin.
The OED entry for teetotum says that that the toy fell out of use because cards were far better gambling games, and that by the 1890's, it had been reduced to a children's toy in the English speaking world.
In the Jewish world, according to Schauss's guide to Jewish Holy Days, the playing card fad of the middle ages led the rabbis issuing a series of edicts condemning excessive gambling. They didn't ban the dreidel, though, perhaps because the "A great miracle happened there" interpretation of the letters allowed the dreidel to escape their wrath.
As to the grogger, the rest of the English speaking world calls them ratchets. You can buy orchestral ratchets from the precussion section of good music supply catalogs, and in much of the world, the ratchet is an important part of the equipment you take to things like soccer matches and new-years parties.
I’m having a hard time finding a statement by the Orthodox Union about its position on gambling, but I did find this story about it in the Orthodox community. I know firsthand one Modern Orthodox family that disintegrated because of gambling. The Orthodox community’s reputation to either shun or keep quiet as to mental health-related problems is legion but even when I was at Bellefaire, many efforts existed, and I know continue to exist to address the issues.
I don’t know any of the Ratners involved in Forest City personally. I don’t know where they are this morning or where they’ll be next weekend for Yom Kippur. I don’t know if they’ve asked their clergy about their endeavors, at any point along the way. I’ve said before that I wonder, how do they square their ambitions. But that is based on how I square mine.
Find out about how your religion views gambling, in all its forms.
Then, vote no on Issue 3.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:48 am September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | 4 Comments
Print This Post
Sep
23
Reason #46 to VOTE NO on ISSUE 3
Filed Under Politics | Comments Off
Because Judaism frowns on it. (I have to use this one today since it’s Rosh Hashana.)
If you’re not a Jew, then of course you don’t need to feel bound or persuaded by this reason. However, given that Judaism is the foundation for many monotheistic religions, including Christianity, at a minimum, it’s informative.
Thanks to someone named Glenda, a very nice rundown on Judaism’s views (yes, Judaism almost always has multiple views of the same issue) can be found here.
The most current opinion about using gambling to raise money for shuls, from the Central Conference of American Rabbis (this group represents the Reform Movement which tends to attract more assimilated, secular Jews, compared to the Conservative and Orthodox Movement, but it’s all relative), since 1979, is
The CCAR deplores the use of gambling devices to raise funds for Jewish religious and communal institutions, as being contrary to our faith and tradition. The CCAR calls upon its members to discourage such practices.
The Conservative movement “urges all members of the Rabbinical Assembly to be alert to the evils of gambling in general, and to oppose not only the more obvious problems of involvement with individuals or groups making a profession of gambling within the synagogue, but even more so, the suble and decidedly unwholesome consequences of gambling as a mainstay of synagogue fiscal management.”
As an aside, here’s an interesting background on the dreidl gambling game, affiliated with Chanuka:
Subject: Question 5.6: What are the origins of the Chanukah Dreidel?
Answer:
Both dreidel and grogger are traditional European toys, although the names they go by in non-Jewish cultures are quite different from the ones we use.
The English (and Latin) name for the dreidel is teetotum -- and you can look up its history in the Oxford English Dictionary. It turns out to be an ancient gambling toy, known in ancient Greece, and with national variations on the letters on the faces of the toy. In all national variants, the letters are a mnemonic for the rules of the game. For example, the traditional English letters are: T - Take all H - Take half N - Nothing P - Put
Although the fact that the Dreidel goes back to Greek times makes it possible that it was known in the Hashemonean kingdom, the fact that the Hebrew letters on the sides make a mnemonic that fits the pattern described above when used as initial letters of Yiddish words suggests that the dreidel entered Jewish culture through the Yiddish speaking Ashkenazi and is not of ancient origin.
The OED entry for teetotum says that that the toy fell out of use because cards were far better gambling games, and that by the 1890's, it had been reduced to a children's toy in the English speaking world.
In the Jewish world, according to Schauss's guide to Jewish Holy Days, the playing card fad of the middle ages led the rabbis issuing a series of edicts condemning excessive gambling. They didn't ban the dreidel, though, perhaps because the "A great miracle happened there" interpretation of the letters allowed the dreidel to escape their wrath.
As to the grogger, the rest of the English speaking world calls them ratchets. You can buy orchestral ratchets from the precussion section of good music supply catalogs, and in much of the world, the ratchet is an important part of the equipment you take to things like soccer matches and new-years parties.
I’m having a hard time finding a statement by the Orthodox Union about its position on gambling, but I did find this story about it in the Orthodox community. I know firsthand one Modern Orthodox family that disintegrated because of gambling. The Orthodox community’s reputation to either shun or keep quiet as to mental health-related problems is legion but even when I was at Bellefaire, many efforts existed, and I know continue to exist to address the issues.
I don’t know any of the Ratners involved in Forest City personally. I don’t know where they are this morning or where they’ll be next weekend for Yom Kippur. I don’t know if they’ve asked their clergy about their endeavors, at any point along the way. I’ve said before that I wonder, how do they square their ambitions. But that is based on how I square mine.
Find out about how your religion views gambling, in all its forms.
Then, vote no on Issue 3.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:48 am September 23rd, 2006 in Politics | Comments Off
Voted into Top 25 Political Mom Blogs
Now on sale-WLST essay included!
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
