Tuesday, March 28, 2017

California Reduces Funding for Los Angeles School with "too many whites"

By Douglas V. Gibbs
AuthorSpeakerInstructorRadio Host

In California not only do the left coast political leaders believe that white privilege exists, but also being "too white" must be punished.  Proof?  At a middle school in the Los Angeles Unified School District the school is under the threat of losing funding because the Walter Reed Middle School in North Hollywood has a local white student population that exceeds 30 percent of the total.

The funding lost would have enabled the school to continue to hire more teachers and have smaller classes, but to qualify, the student body must be 70 percent or higher of Hispanics, blacks, Asians and other "non-Anglos". White families have been moving in, so, over the last two years that percentage has fallen beneath the 70 percent level, meaning Walter Reed no longer qualifies for those extra funds.

Now, because of the news, parents fear that class sizes will increase as the number of teachers and other school personnel likely decreases.

The funding rule falls under a court-ordered integration program that has been in place since 1978.  It's an affirmative-action-style rule that essentially is an insult to non-white populations, with a message that says non-whites need extra help because they are not capable of keeping up on their own.

The reality is that the loss of funding will force the school district to pursue various cuts, though those spending cuts have not yet been announced.

Critics argue that the rule is racist and does more harm than good.  I see it also as a constitutional issue.  Doesn't Article IV. and the 14th Amendment, of the Constitution call for equality under the law?  Why is it that in the mind of the Democrats it's okay to have a rule that says too many whites creates unequal treatment under the law?

Are those non-white populations speaking in concert with the Marxist pigs in George Orwell's Animal Farm, proclaiming that some people are more equal than others?

-- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary

No comments: