Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Education

Oats

Member
I pity the education system in general. Regardless of what they may teach in a particular educational institute, the hardly do it well. Now of course the education system and any mandated system for that reason are ran by people, of course.

I find that we increase the financial value of education more that we do the beneficial value of education. I grew up as an all A student, but I went to a special education school where I was never challenged...though kids in my school still got F's.

In my school during times we would misbehave due to several reason we would be put into jui jutsu grapples. Now looking back as a tax paying citizen, I would rather not see my money going to families who don't instil the value of growth and progress, education wise. If I wanted to pay for someone to get their fingers bit and get stuck under a desk, then the last place I should have to look is an American school....


-----

What are your thoughts on the education system?

Do you agree with this statement-

You can place all the monetary value on an Idea all you like, but the price of something does not dictate its value- Eli Ayers
 
bjj technique as punishment???

and well i am not too fond of govt run schools.

but we cant just get rid of them either.
 
bjj technique as punishment???

and well i am not too fond of govt run schools.

but we cant just get rid of them either.

The government cant do a good of job as a private institution because they are bound my to many regulations and standard, meaning they cant take the lengths to employ love as a means of advancement...

Yup Bjj techniques, i didn't know what they wre then but now i know an arm lock when i see one
 
bjj technique as punishment???

and well i am not too fond of govt run schools.

but we cant just get rid of them either.

agreed jason, is it conceivable to privatize them all? My state has just cut billions of $$'s from schools, and it will just get worse.

So, if it's not a money maker for the gov't, it could be for the private sector. What do you think? Why couldn't we just get rid of our current system? What do you see as the problem with doing this?
 
The government cant do a good of job as a private institution because they are bound my to many regulations and standard, meaning they cant take the lengths to employ love as a means of advancement...

Yup Bjj techniques, i didn't know what they wre then but now i know an arm lock when i see one

ok, i will entertain this.

first. while i would like to kick the govt out of education but the problem is with that.

who will set the standards?even homeschoolers and private schools must meet standards.Also, what about taking govt funding for these publics and pay for private schools?heres the reality of this. magnet and private schools and homeschools sucede as they can reject the unproductive student and the public school must take him.

therefore, we cant just eliminate the public system. we should rather if we are parents be active in our kids education and care for them. while those alone wont solve the issue but imagine if one parent per block per county did that.also the grades of a teen with a healthy family are probably higher then the opposite.
 
agreed jason, is it conceivable to privatize them all? My state has just cut billions of $$'s from schools, and it will just get worse.

So, if it's not a money maker for the gov't, it could be for the private sector. What do you think? Why couldn't we just get rid of our current system? What do you see as the problem with doing this?

well money talks and bull walks

the poor wouldnt be as well educated and the govt must pay for it.back to square one. what state do you live in?if its florida then we can post what rick scott proposes. think about it this way. how much would it cost the parent to send his or her child to private schools vs the govt one that pays for it and through property taxes.

i think my cost for the school board is 300 bucks a year.

could a person making what i make with my bills afford private school?
 
well money talks and bull walks

the poor wouldnt be as well educated and the govt must pay for it.back to square one. what state do you live in?if its florida then we can post what rick scott proposes. think about it this way. how much would it cost the parent to send his or her child to private schools vs the govt one that pays for it and through property taxes.

i think my cost for the school board is 300 bucks a year.

could a person making what i make with my bills afford private school?

Here is my thought on this, I know it will never happen and it's probably a little ideological, although I am very conservative in my views, but if the gov't maintained at least some standards and regulations, and they also subsidized private schools, it would be cheaper for the gov't doing it this way instead of paying for all of it, such as teacher salaries, maintenance of school buildings, and all other expenses. So with a partnership (haha) with the gov't and the parents, schools possibly could be privatized.
So in my idealogical world, standards and success of the students would increase because of smaller classroom sizes, additional schools, and not so many state regulations which prevent the teacher from teaching what they are good at, all teaching is conformed to the required state test.
I realize I do not have the outside of school experience, but what goes on here is not good, students, teachers and parents don't care. I am a 4.0 student in honors class, not bragging at all, I worked hard to get here, but now that I am here, I am typing this in the middle of my class because honors today, is not really what honors should be.
peace -
Jake
 
Here is my thought on this, I know it will never happen and it's probably a little ideological, although I am very conservative in my views, but if the gov't maintained at least some standards and regulations, and they also subsidized private schools, it would be cheaper for the gov't doing it this way instead of paying for all of it, such as teacher salaries, maintenance of school buildings, and all other expenses. So with a partnership (haha) with the gov't and the parents, schools possibly could be privatized.
So in my idealogical world, standards and success of the students would increase because of smaller classroom sizes, additional schools, and not so many state regulations which prevent the teacher from teaching what they are good at, all teaching is conformed to the required state test.
I realize I do not have the outside of school experience, but what goes on here is not good, students, teachers and parents don't care. I am a 4.0 student in honors class, not bragging at all, I worked hard to get here, but now that I am here, I am typing this in the middle of my class because honors today, is not really what honors should be.
peace -
Jake

DONT ASSUME that i'm not consertive. i work for the govt and also read up on what goes on and then make a decision.

again my actual taxes paid for my kids if i had them is only 300 bucks a year based on my appraised property.so again i ask or present this. all must pay for those that cant. even if subisides


problems with your model.

1) education as a profit venture
2) non producers (drop outs)
3) low ball then the private market charges more to the govt(quite common when things are privatised)
4) pay for teachers is lower at the private instutions
5) if tax money is the case then we should have results
6) florida is proposing this idea
7) sex education, and religious instutions
a) if funded by the state then that presents a problem per the lemon v kurtz case
b) though i like that idea a real can of worms
c) all must be funded then equally
d) so would you want tax payer money to teach muslims and other relgions in their own religous instutions
e) science? creationism or evolution


in reality this isnt so cut and dry. if you dont like the govt schools then remove your child and go to a private school or homeschool them as you see fit.legal to do so in all 50.
 
Here is my thought on this, I know it will never happen and it's probably a little ideological, although I am very conservative in my views, but if the gov't maintained at least some standards and regulations, and they also subsidized private schools, it would be cheaper for the gov't doing it this way instead of paying for all of it, such as teacher salaries, maintenance of school buildings, and all other expenses. So with a partnership (haha) with the gov't and the parents, schools possibly could be privatized.
So in my idealogical world, standards and success of the students would increase because of smaller classroom sizes, additional schools, and not so many state regulations which prevent the teacher from teaching what they are good at, all teaching is conformed to the required state test.
I realize I do not have the outside of school experience, but what goes on here is not good, students, teachers and parents don't care. I am a 4.0 student in honors class, not bragging at all, I worked hard to get here, but now that I am here, I am typing this in the middle of my class because honors today, is not really what honors should be.
peace -
Jake

are you sure you arent a floridian?that is what rick scott proposes?
 
are you sure you arent a floridian?that is what rick scott proposes?

No, I am in CA. That's weird that he is proposing that, who is Rick Scott? I have never heard any gov't official mention what I just said, they seem to all want to maintain control of everything. The idea probably came from watching and bits and pieces of other people's ideas.

For the record, and off topic a bit, they should privatize most things - mail, fire stations, schools, student loans - like I said, most things. The gov't was established to govern, not control.

peace
 
No, I am in CA. That's weird that he is proposing that, who is Rick Scott? I have never heard any gov't official mention what I just said, they seem to all want to maintain control of everything. The idea probably came from watching and bits and pieces of other people's ideas.

For the record, and off topic a bit, they should privatize most things - mail, fire stations, schools, student loans - like I said, most things. The gov't was established to govern, not control.

peace

pm me there is something i wish to discuss with you. its most important.

and mailmen are controlled by the feds and that is something that a constitutional consertive should want.

tea partier i guess.

fire stations and well then i guess emt?

why then not also privatise the army, one shouldnt privatise the fire stations as they well.

i should educate you on what they have to pay for themselves

all that education ISNT paid for by the taxpayer btw in my state. in fact, all firefighters must be emt,and also emt fire medics,and the counties dont pay for that. so you would get what you pay for. cheap service done by low wagers.

also crash schools(aircraft fire response).
 
pm me there is something i wish to discuss with you. its most important.

and mailmen are controlled by the feds and that is something that a constitutional consertive should want.

tea partier i guess.

fire stations and well then i guess emt?

why then not also privatise the army, one shouldnt privatise the fire stations as they well.

i should educate you on what they have to pay for themselves

all that education ISNT paid for by the taxpayer btw in my state. in fact, all firefighters must be emt,and also emt fire medics,and the counties dont pay for that. so you would get what you pay for. cheap service done by low wagers.

also crash schools(aircraft fire response).

The only reason I have this opinion is the gov't continues cutting money to these services. For instance, a couple of weeks ago, they interviewed a fire chief and he said because of all the cutbacks, they would not be able to fight every single fire and the fires they fight, they will need to charge depending on how large the fire is. Also the ambulances are having a difficult time.

Basically, the gov't cant' afford all of these services.

I said most services, not all, the military is one where it would be better to remain under fed control.

But, hey, jason, I am young and one day maybe I'll look back and laugh at myself for thinking these are good ideas.
 
The only reason I have this opinion is the gov't continues cutting money to these services. For instance, a couple of weeks ago, they interviewed a fire chief and he said because of all the cutbacks, they would not be able to fight every single fire and the fires they fight, they will need to charge depending on how large the fire is. Also the ambulances are having a difficult time.

Basically, the gov't cant' afford all of these services.

I said most services, not all, the military is one where it would be better to remain under fed control.

But, hey, jason, I am young and one day maybe I'll look back and laugh at myself for thinking these are good ideas.

first off welcome to the reality we are in.

that is how bad it is.

on rick scott

The new governor and his advisory team on education don't seem to care what respected studies or the law say about poverty, merit pay or vouchers, but they seem destined to try the opposite of what sound research says should work. This plan is not about school choice; it's about putting profit before education.

His first step is "Education Savings Accounts," which are the new rebranding of vouchers. Gov. Rick Scott's goal is to give $5,500 to parents directly so they can choose where to send the student, public or private. The Florida Supreme Court ruled this type of voucher system unconstitutional (Bush vs. Holmes); violating among other components the requirement of providing a system of uniform, free public schools. Why would Scott going to waste dwindling tax money on fighting for something that is unconstitutional?

Will this money allow a disadvantaged student to afford a swanky private school? No. Private schools will raise their prices and pocket extra public tax dollars for their own purposes. Charter schools will quickly switch to private schools, preventing any public oversight or accountability. Restructured as private schools, they will open up without county approval and try to crowd out public schools. Unlike public schools, private schools are not be required to provide transportation, give the FCAT, have state-certified teachers, follow Florida's course guidelines or meet class-size restrictions, along with insufficiencies in many other areas. Most important, they can kick students out their school for any reason and selectively recruit the best students from the public school system.

Will this plan work financially? No. On top of Florida's $3.5 billion revenue shortfall, Scott wants to cut the taxes that go to schools by 19 percent and eliminate corporate taxes, which currently can be written off when donated to schools. He wants to cut funding to $5,500 per student, which would put the state last in per-pupil funding, to match our last place in per-capita funding. But $5,500 also would be given to students already attending private schools, to the tune of $1.7 billion. Additionally, if students have the pick of any public school, the districts would be saddled with the cost of busing students all over the county. The numbers simply don't add up.

Who stands to profit from this plan? Corporations that get their taxes eliminated are a good place to start. Second would be the people who already can afford to send their child to private school. Lastly, private schools, online schools and conservative think tanks will profit the most at the expense of your child's education. This is why Scott's education team had representatives from Charter Schools USA, Imagine Schools, KIPP Schools, Florida Virtual School, The Foundation for Florida's Future and StudentsFirst.org. Not a single public school teacher or PTA representative was among his consultants.

Will this plan fix our struggling public schools? No. Most studies show little to no difference in scores between students who use vouchers from the peers they left behind. This plan does nothing to help the students who need it the most; minorities and low-income students. This plan is about allowing private profit off of public students, not school improvement. Gov. Scott should not use our state as a guinea pig for think tanks and special interests. We need to improve our public schools, not destroy them.

and do pm me.
 
uh, ok let me ask you this.

what would you pay for if it means higher taxes for your right to have freedom and pursiuit of life, liberty and happiness?
cant do that if theres no law and order, fires running amok, and also you cant get to the er.

on the military alone. it does alot outside of defending the nation.
drug interdiction.to name just one , wait add hurricane hunting.

also let me state this. what will you be willing sacrifice for the basic function of society if called upon to pay more for taxes.
 
uh, ok let me ask you this.

what would you pay for if it means higher taxes for your right to have freedom and pursiuit of life, liberty and happiness?
cant do that if theres no law and order, fires running amok, and also you cant get to the er.

on the military alone. it does alot outside of defending the nation.
drug interdiction.to name just one , wait add hurricane hunting.

also let me state this. what will you be willing sacrifice for the basic function of society if called upon to pay more for taxes.

As far as I know, we pay more taxes now more than ever before, yet the gov't continues making cuts, larger than every before, so where is the money going?
Higher taxes is not the answer, they will continue cutting services and that is why these things should be privatized.
Higher taxes, the way I see it, is to keep us where they want us, poor and w/out the means to get out of poverty.
peace -
 
first off welcome to the reality we are in.

that is how bad it is.

on rick scott

The new governor and his advisory team on education don't seem to care what respected studies or the law say about poverty, merit pay or vouchers, but they seem destined to try the opposite of what sound research says should work. This plan is not about school choice; it's about putting profit before education.

His first step is "Education Savings Accounts," which are the new rebranding of vouchers. Gov. Rick Scott's goal is to give $5,500 to parents directly so they can choose where to send the student, public or private. The Florida Supreme Court ruled this type of voucher system unconstitutional (Bush vs. Holmes); violating among other components the requirement of providing a system of uniform, free public schools. Why would Scott going to waste dwindling tax money on fighting for something that is unconstitutional?

Will this money allow a disadvantaged student to afford a swanky private school? No. Private schools will raise their prices and pocket extra public tax dollars for their own purposes. Charter schools will quickly switch to private schools, preventing any public oversight or accountability. Restructured as private schools, they will open up without county approval and try to crowd out public schools. Unlike public schools, private schools are not be required to provide transportation, give the FCAT, have state-certified teachers, follow Florida's course guidelines or meet class-size restrictions, along with insufficiencies in many other areas. Most important, they can kick students out their school for any reason and selectively recruit the best students from the public school system.

Will this plan work financially? No. On top of Florida's $3.5 billion revenue shortfall, Scott wants to cut the taxes that go to schools by 19 percent and eliminate corporate taxes, which currently can be written off when donated to schools. He wants to cut funding to $5,500 per student, which would put the state last in per-pupil funding, to match our last place in per-capita funding. But $5,500 also would be given to students already attending private schools, to the tune of $1.7 billion. Additionally, if students have the pick of any public school, the districts would be saddled with the cost of busing students all over the county. The numbers simply don't add up.

Who stands to profit from this plan? Corporations that get their taxes eliminated are a good place to start. Second would be the people who already can afford to send their child to private school. Lastly, private schools, online schools and conservative think tanks will profit the most at the expense of your child's education. This is why Scott's education team had representatives from Charter Schools USA, Imagine Schools, KIPP Schools, Florida Virtual School, The Foundation for Florida's Future and StudentsFirst.org. Not a single public school teacher or PTA representative was among his consultants.

Will this plan fix our struggling public schools? No. Most studies show little to no difference in scores between students who use vouchers from the peers they left behind. This plan does nothing to help the students who need it the most; minorities and low-income students. This plan is about allowing private profit off of public students, not school improvement. Gov. Scott should not use our state as a guinea pig for think tanks and special interests. We need to improve our public schools, not destroy them.

and do pm me.
I do not know if this is true, but I've spoken with teachers off and on over the past couple of years, regarding the lower income people and minorities. They told me their lifestyle is different in that, they are simply in the "survival mode" and their priority is family, not education, and as much work the teachers put into those kids, there is no support for them outside of school. The problem is not with the school necessarily (although there are plenty of problems) but with this one specific, it's the priorities the family places on education, not very high.
peace-
 
As far as I know, we pay more taxes now more than ever before, yet the gov't continues making cuts, larger than every before, so where is the money going?
Higher taxes is not the answer, they will continue cutting services and that is why these things should be privatized.
Higher taxes, the way I see it, is to keep us where they want us, poor and w/out the means to get out of poverty.
peace -

oh i am not saying that there isnt waste.

but what is the cost that we all are willing to pay?i'm trying to make you think what the answer is.we need cops, the military, and anything for law and order.now then lets add these. parks do you use them? what about clean water and food like that too? what about work safety? what about the fcc, fda?

we cant have cheap products and also want a decent wage and not have illegal immigrants. if we want to have immigration fixed then we need to realise that we must be willing to pay more. in reality as in your state and mine of florida ilegals cost and cost alot.so lets say we get an orange cheap but we have to pay for that one orange in taxes triple the price in taxes for that immigrant whose son is american and is in our school system and has no health care.yet that immigrant lives packed in one trailer with 10 of his kin.and 4 are kids. pased on property taxes we are in the red to educate him already.

so then on that alone wouldnt it be cheaper to enforce illegal immmigration laws and also be willing to pay more for americans so that the worker doesnt have to use schips for his or her childs health

7.00 hr doesnt cut it when it comes to making it. thus the working poor. i am agianst welfare but lets be fair if said american works 40 plus and has a family and spouse doenst. then comes the food stamps. so how do we fix this?
do we tell them go get an education? how? they cant , they cant break away from the bread coming in. so then what is your idea.
 
Not sure what price we are willing to pay, the dems are seemingly willing to pay upwards to 60-70% of their income and not much left over to actually help people in their own way, just let the gov't do it.

Your points are good ones, if the gov't did not maintain our parks, including federal lands, we would not have any.

The immigrant problem is just that, a problem, illegal and should not be going on, but again, the dems want them here and I think it was Hilary who wanted to give them all driver's license, but who will pay for their insurance? The gov't again? And they go to our schools for free, which also brings down the quality AND the state testing scoring. I did have a teacher tell me once that it's not necessarily America is doing so poorly in education compared to the world, it's that we put our scores out there - including everyone - those ESL students who can not read or write english but are still expected to take the tests and score them. Where the other countries place their top students on those lists and that is it, so their scores seem higher.

What do you think of an economy reboot? Just starting all over? I don't know what else we could do, nothing has solved any problem thus far, Obama is putting us further into debt, he's not solving anything - so what do you say of a reboot?
 
Not sure what price we are willing to pay, the dems are seemingly willing to pay upwards to 60-70% of their income and not much left over to actually help people in their own way, just let the gov't do it.

Your points are good ones, if the gov't did not maintain our parks, including federal lands, we would not have any.

The immigrant problem is just that, a problem, illegal and should not be going on, but again, the dems want them here and I think it was Hilary who wanted to give them all driver's license, but who will pay for their insurance? The gov't again? And they go to our schools for free, which also brings down the quality AND the state testing scoring. I did have a teacher tell me once that it's not necessarily America is doing so poorly in education compared to the world, it's that we put our scores out there - including everyone - those ESL students who can not read or write english but are still expected to take the tests and score them. Where the other countries place their top students on those lists and that is it, so their scores seem higher.

What do you think of an economy reboot? Just starting all over? I don't know what else we could do, nothing has solved any problem thus far, Obama is putting us further into debt, he's not solving anything - so what do you say of a reboot?

how by declaring bankruptcy?

that would affect trade as we are dependent on china and others.dont think the right is to keen on actualy removing them.

remember cheap labor in abundence is best for that large corp.
 
By INDA S. MORRIS & MAGGIE LEE | The Macon Telegraph
MACON, Ga. (AP) — Donald Chase and his father farm 1,600 acres in Macon County, and if proposed immigration rules being considered by Georgia lawmakers go into effect, Chase and lots of farmers are worried it will cost them more than time and money.

Some farmers say it could put them out of business.

While the immigration rules intended to stem undocumented workers would affect many private employers, agriculture is the state's largest industry — valued at more than $11.3 billion in 2009 — and would be one of the hardest hit.

At the heart of House Bill 87 and Senate Bill 40, as originally written, is that employers will be required to use E-Verify — a federal online employment verification program — to confirm the legal status of employees to work in this country. It would not apply to farmers who use the H-2A program, sometimes referred to as the federal guest worker program, which allows farmers to fill temporary jobs with non-U.S. citizen workers.

E-Verify, authorized in 1996, is administered by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service and compares information from an employee's Form I-9 — Employment Eligibility Verification — to data from U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Social Security Administration records to confirm employment eligibility.

Although currently a voluntary program in most states, E-Verify is mandatory for employers with federal contracts or subcontracts that contain the Federal Acquisition Regulation E-Verify clause.

If undocumented workers are knowingly employed, employers could be fined or serve time in jail.

"The whole idea is it puts the burden on us as employers to police the whole system when this is a federal issue," Chase said. "Besides putting an undue burden on the employer, it puts agriculture at a huge disadvantage. I don't want to be locked up."

Chase Farms Inc. raises peanuts and corn and has a poultry operation. Recently, Chase was spraying a field of winter rye off Pine Level Road near Montezuma to prepare the field for planting corn in a few weeks. Nearby, a crew was working on an irrigation system.

When Chase hires Hispanic workers to work on the farm, he asks for proof that they are in this country legally and he withholds all required taxes and Social Security based on the law, he said. Immigration laws have many exceptions and are complicated to follow, he said.

"If they want to send them all back to Mexico, then send them all back to Mexico," Chase said. "If they want to provide some tool for citizenship, I'm OK with that."

Rodney Dawson, who farms about 1,500 acres of peanuts and 5,000 acres of cotton in Pulaski and Wilcox counties, said he uses eight to 12 immigrants, mostly for the cotton harvest. He does not go through the H-2A program because he only needs the workers for up to 10 weeks.

Dawson is concerned about having to use E-Verify and fears it will keep immigrants — even legal ones — from working here.

"I don't know where we'll find the workers," he said. "You can't find people from here who are interested in the type of work (immigrants) will do for us. ... When it's 100 degrees, they don't mind working."

Dawson said he supports something that would keep people from entering the country illegally.

"But we need some type of system that lets immigrants come into this country to work, because we need them," he said.

Legislators discuss farm worker programs

Bryan Tolar, president of the Georgia Agribusiness Council, said during a House Rural Caucus discussion that agriculture and small business in the state needed a "W-Verify" — a play on E-Verify — as a way to check people who are willing to work on farms.

"If we had a list of those people, I'd like to get it because we're trying to find them every day," Tolar said.

Tolar elaborated that agriculture is not just peach fields and poultry farms; it's a bigger web that includes industry and services like cotton ginners, peanut mills, and agricultural retail and financing. All of that ultimately depends on workers under the sun.

Tolar said HB 87, authored by Matt Ramsey, R-Peachtree City, is a good bill.

"We're just having disagreement on this one particular issue" of E-Verify, Tolar said. "If you're hiring someone without an I-9, you're in violation of federal law. And if you're already in violation of federal law, E-Verify is not going to do anything to affect you. "

He acknowledged that it is possible to get legal labor under the agricultural guest worker H-2A visa program, which requires employers to provide transport, housing, at least $9.11 per hour, and worker's compensation insurance. By Tolar's calculation, that drives labor costs from somewhere between $7.50 and roughly $9 per hour to $13.50 per hour and requires a pre-order with the federal government. About 20 farms in the state do that, he said.

Tolar said federal programs that help employers hire temporary workers are "essential," but added that only the federal government can change them.

The jobs, "honestly, they're not all that desirable," he said. But the industry is becoming more dependent on the dexterity of human hands in vegetable fields that are taking over machine-harvestable commodities like peanuts and cotton.

"We have a very difficult process of getting workers now because they don't show up," Tolar said. "And the ones that do show up, we got to run through an extra hurdle? That's why we disagree with this."

Jon Huffmaster, legislative director for the Georgia Farm Bureau, said at the same meeting that E-Verify is too burdensome for farmers. He passed out copies of the 82-page user manual to prove his point.

If E-Verify says a person might not have their papers, the worker has 18 working days to settle the issue with the federal government, Huffmaster said. In the meantime, the employee stays at work.

"You as the employer have to go back and forth and check E-Verify, he said. "It's not like they contact you. You have to go to the website and log on and check each case for yourself. "

Huffmaster conceded the program is probably doable for any company big enough to have a human resources department, but "for small businesses and for farmers, we just believe it's going to be a more cumbersome thing than a lot of people tend to think."

Rep. Penny Houston, R-Nashville, opined in the ensuing discussion that there is a difference between people who move to a specific place versus who she called "true" migrant workers, who follow the harvest from Florida to the Great Lakes in a season.

"We need some sort of permit for true migrant workers," Houston said.

Copyright 2011 The Associated Press.
 
Back
Top