Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

3

Appeals court rules against Winkleman parents, Parma Schools’ plan for autistic child adequate

Filed Under Courts, Education, Law, Ohio, Social Issues, Youth | 5 Comments

From Cleveland.com:

The Parma School District fulfilled its legal obligations when it created an education plan for an autistic child despite the objections of the boy’s parents, a federal appeals court ruled Friday.

The ruling by the 6th U.S. Circuit Court is an apparent setback for Jeff and Sandee Winkelman, who have argued since 2003 that the district’s plan for their son Jacob did not address behavioral problems caused by autism.

Sandee Winkelman vowed Friday to continue her mission to protect her son’s right to an education. The method by which schools deal with autistic students is flawed and fails to consider their individual needs, she said.

Here’s the pdf for the court decision, but the Cleveland.com post, just minutes ago, didn’t list it.

What’s a little confusing is that, according to this late August article, the Winkelmans just were awarded 2007-2008 tuition for their child’s attendance at the Monarch School, a part of Bellefaire JCB that specifically educates, treats and works with children who’ve been diagnosed along the autism spectrum.

In yet another defeat to the Parma City School District, the State Level Review Officer  Robert Mues has upheld the decision of Impartial Hearing Officer Ronald Alexander.  Jeff and Sandee Winkelman, who have been battling the PCSD for the last five school years over the programming for their child Jacob, who has autism, won reimbursement for Jacob’s attendance at the Monarch School for the 2007/08 school year.  The Monarch School is specially designed to meet the needs of children with autism and is located in Cleveland Heights.

The award of tuition for Monarch to Jacob largely centered on the PCSD failure to address Jacob’s transition needs.  Although the PCSD staff tried to maintain that transition services would be offered, neither the IHO nor the SLRO credit ed the district witnesses testimony.  “It was obvious to everyone at the table that the District had no intention of serving Jacob, and that talk of transition services for Jacob were a sham,” stated Andrew Cuddy, the New York attorney that handled the case for the Winkelmans.

Cuddy explained, “The reasoning of both the IHO and SLRO focused on the unique need of Jacob if he were to transition from Monarch back into a public school setting.  The District’s plan, or better put, lack of a plan, surely would have caused injury to Jacob. The District maintained these services were not legally required under the law.  They should have gotten better legal advice.”

…

The August 21, 2008 ruling of State Level Review Officer Robert Mues ordered the Parma City School District to reimburse Jeff and Sandee Winkelman $68,500 for the 2007/08 school year attendance at the Monarch School.

But today’s appellate decision affirms a trial court’s decision against them both for remuneration for the services they (the parents) have paid for and for finding that the district must make such payments in the future.

From today’s opinion:

The parents of an autistic child sued their local school district, alleging that the school district had failed to provide a “free appropriate public education” (FAPE) in accordance with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), 20 U.S.C. § 1400, et seq., and seeking remuneration for doing so themselves, as well as a court order directing the school district to do so in the future. Both parties moved for judgment on the administrative record and the district court ruled for the school district. The parents appealed.

…

The Winkelmans first argue that the district court erred by placing the burden of proof on them, rather than on the school district. Next, they argue that the district court erred by finding that the school district had provided the FAPE with regard to music therapy, occupational therapy, and speech therapy. Finally, they contend that the district court erred by approving the hearing officer’s decision to disregard the Winkelmans’ expert-witness’s testimony as not credible.

After carefully reviewing the record, the law, and the arguments presented in the appellate briefs, we conclude that each of the Winkelmans’ assignments of error is without merit, and that the district court’s opinion, Winkelman v. Parma Cty. Sch. Dist., 411 F. Supp. 2d 722 (N.D. Ohio 2005), correctly sets out the applicable law and correctly applies that law to the facts in the record. The issuance of a full written opinion by this court would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion, we AFFIRM.

Although I’m not familiar with the actions of the Parma district and what they’ve offered in place of what the Monarch School provides and how well the two programs match the child’s needs, I would have been more suprised if the appellate court had decided in favor of the parents.  Not because I don’t think their case is strong, but only because education law gives a great deal of discretion to district professionals.  Again, this doesn’t mean I can being to assume who was right or wrong in this case, but I would have guessed that this would be the result.

Nonethelss, it’s possible that on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, if the case were taken, who knows.

I wrote about Winkelman before here, here, here here here here and here.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:41 pm October 3rd, 2008 in Courts, Education, Law, Ohio, Social Issues, Youth | 5 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

3

Reason #33 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Filed Under 57ReasonsObamaBiden, Barack Obama, Debates, Joe Biden, leadership, Politics, Sarah Palin, Vice President, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments

Okay, last Vice President-related reason for a while: because Joe Biden will be ready to step into Barack Obama’s position as President immediately and without any loss of confidence from Americans if, God forbid, it would be necessary.

If you didn’t watch the debate last night, then you can check out all the polls that indicate just how much more confident voters are in Biden’s ability to lead:

On the question of the candidates’ qualifications to assume the presidency, 87 percent of those polled said Biden is qualified and 42 percent said Palin is qualified.

Not only is Biden’s number there nearly 9 out of 10 people polled, but it’s more than double the confidence those polled had about Alaska Governor and GOP VP nominee Sarah Palin.

This is really a no-brainer for me since I wanted Biden as the presidential nominee from more or less the beginning (with fantasies that Al Gore might step in or maybe a couple of other women I thought would be worthy nominees).  But that’s okay because, as he showed last night, and as my favorite pundit reiterated as well, post-debate, Biden has done and is doing a superb job in his role as VP nominee.  It’s hard to ask for more.

On November 4, vote for Obama/Biden.

Here are the previous reasons:

Reason #57 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #56 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #55 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #54 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #53 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #52 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #51 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #50 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #49 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #48 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #47 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #46 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #45 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #44 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #43 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #42 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #41 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #40 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #39 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #38, 37, 36 and 35 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Reason #34 to VOTE FOR Obama/Biden

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 11:10 pm October 3rd, 2008 in 57ReasonsObamaBiden, Barack Obama, Debates, Joe Biden, leadership, Politics, Sarah Palin, Vice President, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

3

Why maverickiness fails as an organizing principle of decision-making

Filed Under Barack Obama, Debates, Joe Biden, John McCain, leadership, Politics, Sarah Palin, Vice President, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments

I wrote about this exact point here and here (though not in regard to the debate).

E.J. Dionne, Jr. writes about it in today’s Washington Post column, “Hockey Mom on Thin Ice:”

This week, McCain’s backers signaled their fears that [Alaska Governor and GOP VP nominee Sarah] Palin would fail by trying to discredit the debate in advance. Although it has been known at least since July that Gwen Ifill was writing a book on “Politics and Race in the Age of Obama,” the usual right-wing attack squad waited until two days before the debate to mount a campaign to the effect that Ifill’s book project turned her into a biased moderator. In her measured questioning, Ifill showed that the attack was nonsense.

The core issue, of course, is the contrast between how [Democratic nominee Barack] Obama and [GOP nominee John] McCain chose their running mates. Say what you will about Joe Biden [Dem VP nominee]– and last night, he was far from being either the gaffe machine or the windbag so many predicted would appear on stage — no one loses sleep at the idea of his being in the Oval Office. Obama picked a vice president more likely to help him govern the country than win the chance to do so.

As for McCain, he found himself in a political hole and threw the dice with Palin. At the time of her selection, voters were often compared with “American Idol” watchers who put personality and stage presence above everything else. But it turns out that Americans take the presidency very seriously. And surviving 90 minutes on a stage with Biden did not transform Palin into a plausible president.

Repeating ad nauseum: being good at shooting from the hip or being a maverick is only valuable in certain situations under certain circumstances.

But, as an organizing principle of governing a nation of 300 million diverse people and 50 diverse states for four years, 24/7? Shooting from the hip and being mavericky are the biggest liabilities voters could possibly endorse. And our insurance on people who claim to be uniters not dividers ran out seven years ago.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 2:18 pm October 3rd, 2008 in Barack Obama, Debates, Joe Biden, John McCain, leadership, Politics, Sarah Palin, Vice President, Voting, WH2008 | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

3

[video] David Gergen on Joe Biden at VP debate: Superior, best performance of life

Filed Under Debates, Democrats, Joe Biden, Media, Politics, Vice President, WH2008 | 4 Comments

I don’t think there is any political commentator I like better than David Gergen, who served in the Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Clinton administrations.  He is even-tempered, plain-spoken but specific and nearly always correct.  He also is the one who said back in the late spring that the longer the Democratic primary lasted, the more likely it was that either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton was going to have to have the other as his or her running mate.

But last night, listening to Gergen praise Biden (and praise isn’t even a strong enough word), I’d love to have the chance to ask Gergen what he thinks now re: his belief that Obama needed to select Clinton.

Watch and listen to both of these very short clips:

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:28 am October 3rd, 2008 in Debates, Democrats, Joe Biden, Media, Politics, Vice President, WH2008 | 4 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

3

[poll] Independent women, presidential preferences & Ohio’s unaffiliated voters

Filed Under Barack Obama, Elections, Ohio, Politics, Poll, Voting, WH2008 | Comments Off

New poll out from Gallup this morning that you can read here.  Along with independent men, these are the voters that will seal the deal one way or another.

From the poll info:

All in all, the segments of independent women who are strongest in their support of Obama — and thus who were presumably most sympathetic to Biden in Thursday’s debate — include:

  • those with no religious identification

  • those aged 18 to 34

  • those with college educations

  • those who seldom or never attend church

The segments of independent women who are most likely to support McCain and thus may have been sympathetic to Palin Thursday night include:

  • those who attend church weekly

  • those who are married

  • those aged 55 or older

Finally, the following groups of independent women are most closely divided in their candidate preferences, and — it could be assumed — were the most likely to be swayed one way or the other by the debate (and indeed the events of the final few weeks of the campaign):

    • Catholics

    • those who do not have a college degree

    • those with no children under 18

    • the middle aged, 35 to 54

    • those making between $12,000 and $60,000 a year in household income

    • those mid-range in religiosity, attending church almost every week or monthly

And if you really like parsing demographics:

Assuming that independent female registered voters are a key “swing” group in the campaign, it is useful to delve further into the ways in which they subdivide in terms of candidate preferences. Gallup’s large sample of September interviews allows for a careful analysis of the vote patterns of demographic subgroups within the larger group of independent women. The accompanying table displays candidate choices among a number of these different subgroups of independent women.

This 2006 AP article states that there were 4 million independent voters that year, when Ted Strickland was running for governor.  One of the reasons the numbers is so high (the population of Ohio is 11 million) is because in Ohio, you do not declare your party when you register.  Instead, your party affiliation is determined by the ballot you pull in a primary.  Pull a Dem ballot – you’re a Dem.  Pull a GOP ballot and you’re a Republican.  Didn’t vote in the primary but voted in the general? You’re unaffiliated or…independent.  If you register but don’t vote at all, you’re non-affiliated.

Pollster has a nice article about this here.  An excerpt:

As of 2006, Ohio had 7.6 million registered voters, but only 2.4 million voted in the primary election (of either party) in 2004. Slightly more, 2.5 million, voted in the Ohio primary in 2000, and the turnouts in off-year primaries are lower.

As such, the majority of Ohio’s registered voters do not participate in primaries and are, therefore, registered as “non-partisan” but yet still fully eligible to participate in Tuesday’s primary. The current voter file maintained by Voter Contact Services (a political list vendor) includes 7.9 million registered voters of whom 20% are “registered Democrats,” 19% are registered Republicans and 60% are non-affiliated.

Keep in mind that “party registration” in Ohio is very different from the self-reported “party identification” that most surveys measure. While 60% are unaffiliated on the voter lists, a recent SurveyUSA poll of registered voters finds only 23% identifying as “independent” (while 44% identify as Democrats and 29% as Republicans).

In any case, a few million unaffiliated or independent voters is a lot of swing.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:32 am October 3rd, 2008 in Barack Obama, Elections, Ohio, Politics, Poll, Voting, WH2008 | Comments Off 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

3

Factcheck.org, NPR factchecking on Biden – Palin debate

Filed Under Debates, Joe Biden, Politics, Sarah Palin, Vice President, WH2008 | 2 Comments

Check out Factcheck.org’s rundown of how right, or wrong, Joe Biden and Sarah Palin were in last night’s vice presidential debate.

NPR also did a fact check which you can check here.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 8:11 am October 3rd, 2008 in Debates, Joe Biden, Politics, Sarah Palin, Vice President, WH2008 | 2 Comments 

Print This Post Print This Post

Oct

3

VP Debate reaction from Ohio*

Filed Under Barack Obama, Campaigning, Debates, George Bush, Joe Biden, John McCain, Ohio, Politics, Sarah Palin, WH2008 | 9 Comments

I watched the vice presidential debate between Joe Biden and Sarah Palin with a group of women in my hometown. Three of us are lawyers and one is a speech pathologist who detailed problems in unfunded mandates related to NCLB. The children of our host watched part of the debate, filling out the Palin and Biden Bingo cards (they got FULL!) and the husband of the host watched too.

In addition to watching with these friends, I also participated in two Ohio-based live-blogs (The Chief Source and Buckeye State Blog) and followed Twitter tweets.

You can read the transcript of the debate here.

What did we see? We saw a Palin who pushed the gendered envelope regularly (i.e, she could wink three times and utter with emphasis the word “raping” while there’s no way, no how that Biden could ever have done that), who refused to answer several questions, who had no idea what nuclear proliferation or arms control is about (and if you think that’s not frightening, you must be living in a state of catatonia, or Alaska maybe, despite it’s proximity to Russia), no idea what bankruptcy is, continued to repeat the words “maverick” and “Reformer” but not once distinguished her running mate, John McCain from George Bush.

We also saw a supremely controlled, confident and presidential Joe Biden. He answered every question, he responded to what Palin said and he not once crossed the line with ridiculous facial smirks or other distracting tactics that added nothing to the content of what was being said.

So, who won?

Let me posit this: In a VP debate, but maybe especially this one? That’s not the real question – because Biden and Palin are not running against each other. They’re trying to get their head of the ticket elected.

Given that, Biden did an excellent job working to get Obama support: he showed that Obama made a good decision in choosing Biden. That support Obama as a good decision-maker.

As for Palin, she met the basement level expectations set by her own party and ticket that’s treated her with nothing but sexism since they anointed her. And that, people like Pat Buchanan and Kit Bond, are calling a slamdunk against Biden.

‘Cept they got that wrong – she isn’t up against Biden. She needs to show that McCain’s choice of her shows that he has good decision-making abilities.

The key demographic: Independents and moderates – what do they think? How do they feel about the top of the ticket, after seeing this debate?

That’s really all that matters. And my speculation is that Palin did what she did at the very beginning: solidifies the base from feeling freaked out, and that’s about it. Biden’s showing, on the other hand, will solidify the moderates and independents who’ve been questioning McCain himself and now can see the overall strength in the Obama/Biden ticket.

Palin alone cannot carry the burden of what McCain has to accomplish in the next 30 days. I could be wrong – I have been before, but tonight was how she did after four days of constant prep in seclusion with handlers. Now what? Where’s she go next? Who interviews her next?

Neither the press nor the public is going to let up. And they shouldn’t. The question is, what will McCain and Obama do? They really are, in the end, the only ones that matter.

*I wrote this last night about 45 minutes after the debate ended, and cross-posted at The Moderate Voice.

Bookmark and Share

By Jill Miller Zimon at 7:38 am October 3rd, 2008 in Barack Obama, Campaigning, Debates, George Bush, Joe Biden, John McCain, Ohio, Politics, Sarah Palin, WH2008 | 9 Comments 

"));