Perdue wants performance pay for teachers based on student growth
This morning Gov. Sonny Perdue made his pitch for performance pay, which is one of the criteria to quality for Race to the Top money from the feds. It would be an option for current teachers, but a way of life for new ones seeking salary enhancements.
I have always thought this was a good idea, especially Perdue’s plan to end automatic pay increases for graduate degrees, no matter whether the degree had any bearing on what the teacher taught.
Read over the info and let’s discuss:
Here is the official release:
ATLANTA – Governor Perdue discussed a range of issues including education, water, transportation and health insurance reform today at the annual Eggs & Issues Breakfast hosted by the Georgia Chamber of Commerce at the Georgia World Congress Center.
At the breakfast, the Governor outlined a proposal to enhance the way Georgia compensates its teachers by adding a performance-based pay option to the existing salary system. The compensation model would award salary bonuses based on classroom observation and student growth, enabling effective teachers to be eligible for much higher salaries much earlier in their careers. Under the current system, teachers only receive salary increases for years spent teaching and for advanced degrees earned.
“Our current system only incentivizes the degree, not the degree to which students learn,” said Governor Perdue. “We must encourage our best and brightest to enter the teaching profession and must reward effective teachers in order to retain them in Georgia classrooms. Student achievement must be our driving force, and our compensation model must reflect that focus.”
The proposed legislation will preserve the current salary structure but will allow current teachers to opt-in to the new performance pay system when it is fully implemented in 2014. New teachers and those opting into the pay system will not be eligible for automatic supplements for advanced degrees, but will be eligible for higher bonuses based on classroom observations and the degree to which their students have grown academically. In a recent survey of 20,000 Georgia educators, 80 percent said these were the components on which teachers should be evaluated. The bill will enable those already enrolled in advanced degree programs to complete their studies and remain in the current pay scale.
This proposal is part of Georgia’s Race to the Top application, a competitive federal grant that offers as much as $400 million for Georgia schools. Twenty-two local school systems have committed to teaming with the state on the application to implement innovative education policies, including a pay-for-performance plan.
The bill requires the State Board of Education to adopt the pay-for-performance system by 2014, using the experience of the Race to the Top systems to develop a plan that will benefit teachers and students statewide.
With the news of Warren County’s loss of accreditation, the Governor also renewed his call for school board governance legislation to ensure that every student has the benefit of responsible leadership at the school system level. The legislation will standardize board ethics policies and board training, clarify the law delineating the roles and responsibilities of superintendents and board members, create minimum qualifications for board candidates, and give the state the ability to find responsible citizens to serve on school boards when existing members fail to serve the interests of their students.
“It is incredibly frustrating to watch the fallout from a dysfunctional school board undermine earnest teachers and jeopardize their students’ potential,” Governor Perdue said. “That’s why we brought this legislation last year, and now we find ourselves in a similar situation with yet another school system facing loss of accreditation.”
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2012 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
97 comments Add your comment
jim d
January 12th, 2010
10:51 am
pay not way
jim d
January 12th, 2010
10:55 am
perhaps the Gov. need take a look at the accrediting body and its structure as well
Maureen Downey
January 12th, 2010
10:55 am
jim d, Thanks. I had a different and longer headline that used “new pathway” for bonuses, but it didn’t fit. My quick editing to a shorter headline was a bit too quick. It is now fixed.
Maureen
jim d
January 12th, 2010
10:56 am
thought it might save a lot of flack.
Maureen Downey
January 12th, 2010
11:02 am
jim d, Absolutely. I lose sleep over typos and misspellings. This is a tough crowd on those issues.
Maureen
Old School
January 12th, 2010
11:03 am
Maureen, will CTAE instructors be eligible for this incentive? How will our students’ academic growth be measured? Many of us are hired directly out of industry and have not gone through traditional teacher training. Our classes are primarily skills-based with related math and language arts integrated into the training and our focus is usually job entry level preparation.
There are standardized tests out there (NOCTI, ADDA Certified Drafter, SAE, etc) but unless we have students in consecutive training, we may not be able to cover the skills & knowledge in enough depth to adequately prepare them for the exams.
eb1
January 12th, 2010
11:05 am
I am all for pay based on kids performance as long as there is an accurate tracking system in place to note the students past performance as compared to what happens in my room. Without that system, this is all conversation. I am not a fan of increases that are based on classroom observations. Way to subjective and prone to favoritism. Do it based on results.
jim d
January 12th, 2010
11:08 am
old school,
guess we just fall back on the old Bushisim, “is our children learning”
Maureen Downey
January 12th, 2010
11:08 am
Old School, I will ask the governor’s office about that. Anyone know how other states handle this? What is Denver doing in its program?
Maureen
Mark
January 12th, 2010
11:09 am
Maybe we should do the same thing to our legislatures. Pay them based on their performance. But then again they wouldn’t get paid. Maybe we should have a certification test to see if they are qualifed to represent. Maybe another one that specializes in what ever committee he or she serves. I know one thing most could use lessons in ethics, economics, and what really matters to the voters. This year I do not care what party they are, I am voting them out. We need a change at the state. The General Assembly is so out of touch with voters, that it has became sad.
Maureen Downey
January 12th, 2010
11:10 am
eb1, I understand that the classroom observation component came out of comments from teachers, who want something other than scores considered in their evaluations.
Maureen
Say what?
January 12th, 2010
11:10 am
eb1, agreed. Considering that the bulk of AYP-related data is based on flawed statistical analysis (comparing last year’s 3rd graders to this year’s 3rd graders, mind-boggling), I wouldn’t want my pay based on anything of the sort, either.
I figure a lot of this is all-talk, little-action, typical political pandering.
jim d
January 12th, 2010
11:16 am
It stands to reason that the largest increases in test scores would be accomplished if teachers didn’t teach to the bottom of the class but focused more on the majority or middle of the class. So would this mean that the average student would now be provided with the FPE that has been overlooked these many years??
?????
January 12th, 2010
11:16 am
What do you do about teachers who are say ISS or alternative school coordinators and want to opt for the pay – for – performance? How do you evaluate them?
Kathy
January 12th, 2010
11:17 am
Here’s a pay for performance idea: Give parents vouchers to send their child to intra, inter, public,or private schools. Good teachers and administrators will attract the populations. The more folks who enroll in the shool, the more pay.
Regardless what anyone believes, the NCLB 2014 AYP goal is causing a certain level of frustration and breeding intolerance amongst school personnel at all levels. At the same time we need to remember that the only standard the school system has to meet is to meet an AVERAGE level of proficiency.
Look, it’s not like these schools have to get every child to an A, they simply have to get kids to a C, and the kids are to graduate. However, once a kid gets 16, the system really does not have to give a rat’s behind about the kid’s education, which may be why Georgia gives $500 reward if a kid drops out, gets a GED, and enrolls in a tech college(which is likely the same college he/she got their GED)
GIVE PARENTS VOUCHERS and then watch progress.in the education system..
Mac
January 12th, 2010
11:23 am
And where is the money going to come from to pay teachers more? Selling fish from the old fishing hole?
Idiotic!
Good ideal – yes. Actually doable? – no
Only 22 districts out of 180 committed to the Race to the Top boondoggle? That should tell you something right there.
jim d
January 12th, 2010
11:28 am
Mac,
22 out of 180 is a good thing—it means we only have 22 systems that think they can CHEAT their way thru this one.
Mac
January 12th, 2010
11:29 am
Jamie Vollmer’s classic that deserves a re-read every once in a while:
“If I ran my business the way you people operate your schools, I wouldn’t be in business very long!”
I stood before an auditorium filled with outraged teachers who were becoming angrier by the minute. My speech had entirely consumed their precious 90 minutes of inservice. Their initial icy glares had turned to restless agitation. You could cut the hostility with a knife.
I represented a group of business people dedicated to improving public schools. I was an executive at an ice cream company that became famous in the middle1980s when People Magazine chose our blueberry as the “Best Ice Cream in America.”
I was convinced of two things. First, public schools needed to change; they were archaic selecting and sorting mechanisms designed for the industrial age and out of step with the needs of our emerging “knowledge society”. Second, educators were a major part of the problem: they resisted change, hunkered down in their feathered nests, protected by tenure and shielded by a bureaucratic monopoly. They needed to look to business. We knew how to produce quality. Zero defects! TQM! Continuous improvement!
In retrospect, the speech was perfectly balanced – equal parts ignorance and arrogance.
As soon as I finished, a woman’s hand shot up. She appeared polite, pleasant – she was, in fact, a razor-edged, veteran, high school English teacher who had been waiting to unload.
She began quietly, “We are told, sir, that you manage a company that makes good ice cream.”
I smugly replied, “Best ice cream in America, Ma’am.”
“How nice,” she said. “Is it rich and smooth?”
“Sixteen percent butterfat,” I crowed.
“Premium ingredients?” she inquired.
“Super-premium! Nothing but triple A.” I was on a roll. I never saw the next line coming.
“Mr. Vollmer,” she said, leaning forward with a wicked eyebrow raised to the sky, “when you are standing on your receiving dock and you see an inferior shipment of blueberries arrive, what do you do?”
In the silence of that room, I could hear the trap snap…. I was dead meat, but I wasn’t going to lie.
“I send them back.”
“That’s right!” she barked, “and we can never send back our blueberries. We take them big, small, rich, poor, gifted, exceptional, abused, frightened, confident, homeless, rude, and brilliant. We take them with ADHD, junior rheumatoid arthritis, and English as their second language. We take them all! Every one! And that, Mr. Vollmer, is why it’s not a business. It’s school!”
In an explosion, all 290 teachers, principals, bus drivers, aides, custodians and secretaries jumped to their feet and yelled, “Yeah! Blueberries! Blueberries!”
And so began my long transformation.
Since then, I have visited hundreds of schools. I have learned that a school is not a business. Schools are unable to control the quality of their raw material, they are dependent upon the vagaries of politics for a reliable revenue stream, and they are constantly mauled by a howling horde of disparate, competing customer groups that would send the best CEO screaming into the night.
None of this negates the need for change. We must change what, when, and how we teach to give all children maximum opportunity to thrive in a post-industrial society. But educators cannot do this alone; these changes can occur only with the understanding, trust, permission and active support of the surrounding community. For the most important thing I have learned is that schools reflect the attitudes, beliefs and health of the communities they serve, and therefore, to improve public education means more than changing our schools, it means changing America.
rural education
January 12th, 2010
11:29 am
What about smaller systems where there is no choice? Vouchers would be completely useless. Secondly are they going to provide transportation for these students. Our district does not provide transportation for out of district students, thus you eliminate the poorer kids. Vouchers sound great in theory, but I do not think they are really practical.
Bloodbike
January 12th, 2010
11:29 am
I’m really concerned about this, because this will probably cause GA to run into a teacher shortage down the line. Plus, why are we placing the blame on teachers when its the parents fault that there children aren’t doing well in school? What will happen is that the teachers really worth anything will only teach at the schools where the kids and parents are truly interested in learning, but the schools where the parents and teachers have a historical record of low grades will only get teachers who rank low or want have teachers period. The more I think about it, the more it makes perfect sense. Heck, most kids in GA don’t give a hill of beans about education anyway. Sad but true.
Mac
January 12th, 2010
11:29 am
Exactly right jim d!
catlady
January 12th, 2010
11:33 am
FIRST you have to accurately measure where kids are at the very beginning of the school year. (Not waiting till October). That accurate measurement is a real killer, as you can’t use the previous year’s CRCT–not comparable.
THEN you have to accurately measure what they know at the end of the year, based on an accurate version of the test you gave them at the beginning.
THEN you have to make it “worth the kid’s while” to do their best. They KNOW the CRCT means nothing to them.
AND IF you include any other measurement, you introduce administrator bias, which is significant. Too many adminstrators play gotcha with their non-favorites.
And what about the “others”? push ins, media, art, music, pe, etc? And what about kids what move in in January? Many schools have large turnovers during the year.
On the subject of teacher raises tied to degrees: I understand what you are saying. BUT, are you saying your life was not bettered by the non-journalism classes you took in college, Ms. Downey?
Better to put an end to these half-rate schools selling their degrees for advancement, like we have in many parts of Georgia. Where I teach we have a very high percentage of teachers with masters and ed spec degrees in “curriculum”, but probably 3/4 are from such illustrious universities as “Lincoln Memorial University” and “Piedmont College.”
rural education
January 12th, 2010
11:38 am
I have no problem in paying more for more expertise. If I have a degree in history, and I teach history then I should make more than someone with a “social studies” degree. We can dance around the pay issue for ever, but I doubt this plan will come to fruition. What do you do about the people who don’t opt for the new program? Are they looked down on because they prefer the safety of those salaries to the opportunity to make more? There are so many varialbles to pay for performance that a workable plan would be very hard to achieve.
rural education
January 12th, 2010
11:42 am
I think part of the problem is in the “teacing degree” I think it is better to have a degree in an area, say history, and then take certification classes. Teachers who teach in their specialty are going to be, for the most part, much more competent in their subject matter than those who just hold general degrees.
Maureen Downey
January 12th, 2010
11:44 am
catlady, Your post reminded me of a feisty superintendent who used to complain to me in a joking fashion that all his teachers were getting graduate degrees at “that mortuary college in Tennessee.” (He didn’t stay too long in Georgia.)
Maureen
no, nope, no way, never, not in my life time, ...
January 12th, 2010
11:47 am
Teachers are very quick to offer their opposition to performance-based pay systems – and I understand the technical difficulty associated with the system. But, what do they offer as an alternative? Automatic 5% raise every year no matter what? You must be able to tell which of your colleagues who are teaching students coming into your classrooms are doing better job than others. Should they all receive the same pay just because they are in their classrooms?
Interested Observer
January 12th, 2010
11:49 am
I noted the governor’s message said “The compensation model would award salary bonuses based on classroom observation and student growth”…soooo I guess the teachers teaching the best and brightest students won’t be getting any performance bonuses either. If you have kids performing at the top, how much more can you “improve” them (at least statistically)? The growth with this group of students will be minimal at best. Hmmm…..
jj
January 12th, 2010
12:09 pm
Maybe we should work on a system that taxes parents based on their child’s performance. Smart child=lower taxes. My wife is a teacher at a very good school, but that school, from what she is being told, is on a downward slide based on the community being on a downward slide. Now, this opt in, if government has its way, would cease to become an opt in and soon become permanent fixture; and many teachers will simply abandoned those areas for more prominent areas. I mean who wants to work in an area where the average child doesn’t have the proper backing from their family; teachers can only do so much. Grant it, there are some exceptions out their, but not every teacher has the option of putting in 16 hours a day to help those kids who can’t keep up. The more I think about it, the sillier it seems. Right now I know someone is being asked to bump grades up so that the overall appearance of the school looks better to those that are looking over their records. It’s not uncommon, but it’s wrong. Does anyone think that individual teachers will lighten the load and “Grade up” to benefit their bank accounts? I believe they will. The solution to all of this is to get rid of the bureaucracy and increase competition between the schools, allowing parents to transfer their kids to whatever school they want, and I would seriously consider a penalty on those families that stress the importance of education to their kids.
jj
Dennis
January 12th, 2010
12:15 pm
What the governor is talking about is “merit pay”, which is just another “pie in the sky” political dodge for government’s irresponsible funding of public education. If our government wanted to save public education as bad as it wanted to save Wall Street, it could have done so a long, long time ago by using the same philosophy as it did to save Wall Street- “It’s too big to fail.”
Disgusted
January 12th, 2010
12:16 pm
Maureen and Catlady, come on now! Up here in Hall Co practically everyone hired in the last 4 years for a school level leadership position has a Lincoln Leadership degree. They must be the best!
Artricia
January 12th, 2010
12:22 pm
Was there any mention or thought to Specialists who do not have classes to call their own. ie. Art, mucis, PE, drama, dance? We teach schoolwide. There will need to be a plan for those thousands of teachers out there. Any ideas?
Legislative hosing
January 12th, 2010
12:41 pm
Does this count for the morons under the gold dome?????
Tony
January 12th, 2010
12:43 pm
Junk!
Dunwoody Mom
January 12th, 2010
12:44 pm
Interesting – just another way of saying “merit pay”. Isn’t that what got Roy Barnes in trouble? Insisting that teacher’s be held accountable? Gee, John Trotter, what are your thoughts?
Teacher&mom
January 12th, 2010
12:51 pm
This is an idea that has merit but the logistics of implementing a FAIR pay-for-performance system would be monumental. If CRCT/EOCT scores are used, would the DOE leave the cut-off scores alone or would they be re-adjusted annually? I worry that this would be an “easy fix” to budget shortfalls….reduce teacher pay by quietly adjusting cut-off scores.
The class keys that are being introduced by the DOE outline their expectations of quality teaching and the new teacher evaluations. I wonder if the keys will be tied into the pay-for-performance?
Catlady-Piedmont College is already one step ahead of this process. One of their adjunct professors is a friend of mine. He was discussing how they have adjusted the portfolio requirement to reflect the rubrics used in the class keys. What he outlined for me was very rigorous and in-depth. I’m not sure I would lump Piedmont College with the diploma mill crowd.
RJ
January 12th, 2010
1:00 pm
For those that think that teachers are totally against this practice, let me state that I would welcome it IF it included all teachers. I don’t teach “core” classes, but I am certified in my area. How would I be evaluated and compensated?
Teacher&mom
January 12th, 2010
1:04 pm
more thoughts….
What would you do if the school year was cut short by weather? In the past, some school systems have lost several WEEKS of instruction due to hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, blizzards, etc. Granted weather events of this magnitude are rare (thank goodness) but they do happen. To think that this won’t affect test scores is naive. I once taught in a school system devastated by the Palm Sunday tornadoes. The students were shell-shocked for the remainder of the year. We were in the middle of CRCT testing when a thunderstorm hit. I had 8th grade students crying in fear of another tornado. My test scores took a nosedive that year. However, this was pre-NCLB and we didn’t fret about the drop. Common sense still reigned at that time.
While my test scores are usually strong, I would be very hesitant to sign up for a pay-for-performance system. Based on what happened to the NBC teachers, I don’t have a lot of confidence in the governor or our state school superintendent.
Elizabeth
January 12th, 2010
1:14 pm
If you want to judge my peformance and how much my kids grow, then do so. But stop telling me HOW to achieve that growth and making me be on the same page and do the same thing as the teachers across the hall. I know the curriculum; I know the standards. Let me teach it my way as I did in the 70’s ( and back me up when parents complain that I am “too hard” on their little darlings)and I guarantee that my kids will grow no matter where they are when they come to me. But if I have to do it the way the “experts” want me to and follow a script, which is what I have to do now, then there will not be the growth you or I want to see.
As for advanced degrees.. mine all relate to the subject I teach. They helped me immeasurably to become a subject specialist and a better teacher. But then, I got my advanced degrees by teaching all day and going to school at night at Georgia State University. GSU is easy to get into but difficult to get out of because they cut you no slack. I worked hard for my degrees and to see someone go to a fly by night school just to get a meaningless degree that teaches them nothing infuriates me. I learned more and know more than my principal who has a doctorate, taught English, and does not know how to speak or write correctly. And I earn the extra money ( such as it is) a thousand times over EVERY DAY.
I cannot reject my blueberries. I don’t want to. But I want to be free to use my knowledge, experience, and expertise to teach the way I KNOW works even though it is not always interesting, modern, or engaging. I want to do it my way on my schedule, not the county’s or the state’s. Until I can do that, I cannot guarantee that as much progress will be made as is needed to be made. ( Note I did not say that no progess would be made.
Anonymous teacher
January 12th, 2010
1:57 pm
I think the idea of having merit-based pay based in part on observations has got to be one of the dumber ideas that I’ve ever heard. There are some absolutely wonderful administrators out there. But there are some serious nightmares masquarading as administrators out there as well. Probably more of those than the former.
Consider this: two years ago in my school, a teacher was given a “Needs Improvement” on an observation because their Essentual Question wasn’t posted. Well, actually it was posted on the board in their classroom, but this teacher had taken their class elsewhere so they would have space to do a group activity and there WASN’T any board around upon which to write this wonderful question. The administrator wasn’t going to back down and adhere to common sense on this and the “Needs Improvement” stood.
Also, at my same school, a particular teacher frequently comes in late, leaves during planning to run personal errands, and leaves early. Yet, strangely enough, nothing is ever said to this particular teacher. Recently, the teacher actually came in 2 and a half hours late (I know as I had to cover their room) yet signed in as being on time. And, weirdly enough, that particular teacher is a close personal friend of the administrator. As teacher punctuality and attendance is important and does affect teacher performance, who wants to bet that that particular teacher does NOT get a “Needs Improvement”?
This sort of thing and worse goes on in every system in this state. I’ve been in buildings where the principal was having affairs with teachers, would go out drinking with teachers, etc. Do you think that favoritism would show its head? Yep…even if it wasn’t meant to.
If you have a petty, vindictive administrator then you have a school where teachers who are “on the list” will never be given good students, who will be given the bad duties, and whose office referrals will be lost.
I know that Jim D says that teachers are victims because they choose to be. However, there is absolutely no way that teachers are able to evaluate principals as we are not given that sort of power. It would be interesting if we were. I do know that my current principal would be GONE if such a thing were possible.
GTechNick
January 12th, 2010
2:00 pm
I’m glad to see that you are reporting this correctly. WSB’s site has COMPLETELY misconstrued the new program that was introduced and people over there are going nuts. Thanks.
Joy in Teaching
January 12th, 2010
2:04 pm
I just got a 7th grade student who will be 16 in a month. He isn’t a special needs child. He’s just a hooligan. I imagine that his CRCT test scores will be absolutely lovely when compared with the 12 year olds that I have in class. (That was sarcasm in case you missed it.)
So the Governor is saying that my pay should be based in part on this kind of child and his accomplishments? I would probably make more pushing a broom.
GTechNick
January 12th, 2010
2:12 pm
J.I.T. – It is just an optional program on top of the current pay structure. I suggest you copy and paste this link… http://gov.georgia.gov/00/press/detail/0,2668,78006749_78013037_155353123,00.html
Mark
January 12th, 2010
2:22 pm
I think everyone is missing the point. Even if it does pass, it will not last. I really do not know how this is going to be funded. Cagle is already wanting to cut more taxes. All it does is raise the local level of taxes and tututions for college students. I am becoming weary of this General Assembly.
mystery poster
January 12th, 2010
2:43 pm
@Catlady and Teacher&mom:
I have a Masters Degree from Piedmont college, and I assure you the courses were rigorous and relevant.
Teacher&mom
January 12th, 2010
2:58 pm
Mystery poster- My EdS is from Piedmont and I agree with you. I loved my professors and I walked away with a deeper understanding of curriculum and instruction. They have a quality program. They should not be lumped with diploma mill group.
Good Government
January 12th, 2010
3:08 pm
THANK YOU GOVERNOR PERDUE. THIS LEGISLATION IS WAY OVERDUE.
Leonard Schreiber
January 12th, 2010
3:29 pm
Once again we have government thought without thinking. The biggest aspect of how a child does in school is how involved the parent is with the student. Are we going to punish teachers, because the parent does not back up the lessons learned in school. If the parent doesn’t care, there is nothing a teacher can do about it.
With the idea of paying a teacher based on results, who is going to want to teach at a lower performing school. (These are usually the schools with poor parent participation.) So if good teachers do not want to teach at poor performing schools, who is going to teach there? A seems like this is just an idea that will create a vicious circle.
While there are good teachers and bad teachers, just like in every other job, I do not see where we should be punishing teachers for the failures of parents. If you want to improve schools you first must improve parents.
what's right for kids???
January 12th, 2010
3:41 pm
I am all for teacher accountability. How about this: if they don’t do thier jobs, FIRE THEM! There’s your accountability right there. And it’s a heck of a lot easier than this merit pay hooey. Gives the kids what they need and the schools what they need.
Rural Education
January 12th, 2010
3:48 pm
Who really cares what the worst governor in recent memory wants to do about eduation. He won’t be around when and if it ever comes to pass. What we should be discussing the the “anti-education” agenda of the entire legislature. Perdue has cut funding to educaton for 8 years, showing just how important it is to him.
Cherokee
January 12th, 2010
3:56 pm
A sentiment from above — that diploma mill and legit ed program grads are paid the same — that’s why I support performance pay like the Gov is laying out. It’s a joke that someone taking an online Master’s degree to get the pay bump should be paid like you and the thousands of other good teachers who take their higher degree and do good in the classroom.
Remember, the Gov is proposing a value-added system — so the basic salary schedule will stay in place then good teachers get goodies. The other thing to consider is that it’s not going to be based strictly on student performance. I would hope they also take student progress through the year into account like the do in Florida. Their system works pretty well and teachers are happy with it.
I’ll be interested to see a bill in the legislature. Overall though, this isn’t a bad idea