Call sheds light on civics staff cuts

September 8, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The following blog was written by IL reporter Rebecca Berfanger.

Following the announcement that the Indiana Bar Foundation planned to restructure its civics education staff from three staff members to one after learning there would no longer be funds from the Interest on Lawyers Trust Accounts due to low interest rates, the IBF held a conference call for teachers to express their concerns and ask questions of the current civics education staff and IBF executive director Chuck Dunlap.

They let me listen in while I was waiting for a plane to return from vacation on Tuesday afternoon.

At the beginning of the call, and in past interviews about this for Indiana Lawyer, Dunlap emphasized that this was not easy for anyone involved. He also mentioned when IBF learned that interest rates were high enough for IOLTA funds to cover civics education funding – a rarity among other civics education programs around the country – the plan at the time was to deal with a decrease in funding if and when it happened. Unfortunately, that time is now, and because he and others have no reason to believe interest rates will bounce back anytime soon, they saw a need to make a change.

But if the IOLTA funds make a comeback to a high enough level to add staff in the future, he said, the IBF would likely do so. He added the new structure is similar to how the IBF used to handle civics education programs until a few years ago, and that the quality of the experience for the students and teachers involved shouldn’t be affected by the change.

The IOLTA funding was also only used for the civics education team – other funding sources pay for class materials and the district and state competitions, and for travel expenses for teachers to attend national trainings. And Indiana State Bar Association sections raise money for the travel expenses for students to go to the national competition in Washington, D.C. Those funding sources haven’t changed, Dunlap said.

He also mentioned the Hour for Civics program, which was started to make up for a decrease in IOLTA funds last year. That program, which encouraged attorneys to donate the equivalent of a billable hour to civics education, had not raised nearly enough last year or this year to make up for the loss of IOLTA funds.

Dunlap said the way they were restructuring the staff wouldn’t be to have one person doing three jobs. The plan is to figure out how that new person, who would start by Jan. 1, 2011, along with Dunlap and other IBF staff members, can help district coordinators and their volunteers do more than they have needed to do in the past due to the help they’ve been able to rely on from IBF staff.

This could be a challenge, said Erin Braun, current director of civic education for the IBF, because many of the districts have grown in the last few years in terms of teachers and recently added district coordinators, so there will definitely be a learning curve for the newer district coordinators. But because the district coordinators and teachers are so enthusiastic, she didn’t think it would be a problem for them to want to do more.

She and Kyle Burson, director of the IBF’s We The People program, will be available through the end of the year to help with the transition. They will also be available on a contract basis for other programs that have other funding sources, such as the Frontiers program, which is similar to We The People, but for community groups instead of school classrooms.

The third staff member, director of Project Citizen Eric Steele, starts a new job with the Center for Civics Education in Washington, D.C., at of the end of this week. He applied for and accepted that job before the IBF announced plans to restructure the civics education staff.

As an outside observer, what was remarkable about the call was the level of transparency between the teachers and the civics education team members. The IBF staff answered all of their questions as best as they could, and at the end suggested that if there was anything they didn’t address or wanted to address later, the teachers could call any of them directly.

While the program is changing, volunteers will be needed now more than before – could you spare some time for civics education in Indiana?
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I have been on this program while on parole from 2011-2013. No person should be forced mentally to share private details of their personal life with total strangers. Also giving permission for a mental therapist to report to your parole agent that your not participating in group therapy because you don't have the financial mean to be in the group therapy. I was personally singled out and sent back three times for not having money and also sent back within the six month when you aren't to be sent according to state law. I will work to het this INSOMM's removed from this state. I also had twelve or thirteen parole agents with a fifteen month period. Thanks for your time.

  2. Our nation produces very few jurists of the caliber of Justice DOUGLAS and his peers these days. Here is that great civil libertarian, who recognized government as both a blessing and, when corrupted by ideological interests, a curse: "Once the investigator has only the conscience of government as a guide, the conscience can become ‘ravenous,’ as Cromwell, bent on destroying Thomas More, said in Bolt, A Man For All Seasons (1960), p. 120. The First Amendment mirrors many episodes where men, harried and harassed by government, sought refuge in their conscience, as these lines of Thomas More show: ‘MORE: And when we stand before God, and you are sent to Paradise for doing according to your conscience, *575 and I am damned for not doing according to mine, will you come with me, for fellowship? ‘CRANMER: So those of us whose names are there are damned, Sir Thomas? ‘MORE: I don't know, Your Grace. I have no window to look into another man's conscience. I condemn no one. ‘CRANMER: Then the matter is capable of question? ‘MORE: Certainly. ‘CRANMER: But that you owe obedience to your King is not capable of question. So weigh a doubt against a certainty—and sign. ‘MORE: Some men think the Earth is round, others think it flat; it is a matter capable of question. But if it is flat, will the King's command make it round? And if it is round, will the King's command flatten it? No, I will not sign.’ Id., pp. 132—133. DOUGLAS THEN WROTE: Where government is the Big Brother,11 privacy gives way to surveillance. **909 But our commitment is otherwise. *576 By the First Amendment we have staked our security on freedom to promote a multiplicity of ideas, to associate at will with kindred spirits, and to defy governmental intrusion into these precincts" Gibson v. Florida Legislative Investigation Comm., 372 U.S. 539, 574-76, 83 S. Ct. 889, 908-09, 9 L. Ed. 2d 929 (1963) Mr. Justice DOUGLAS, concurring. I write: Happy Memorial Day to all -- God please bless our fallen who lived and died to preserve constitutional governance in our wonderful series of Republics. And God open the eyes of those government officials who denounce the constitutions of these Republics by arbitrary actions arising out capricious motives.

  3. From back in the day before secularism got a stranglehold on Hoosier jurists comes this great excerpt via Indiana federal court judge Allan Sharp, dedicated to those many Indiana government attorneys (with whom I have dealt) who count the law as a mere tool, an optional tool that is not to be used when political correctness compels a more acceptable result than merely following the path that the law directs: ALLEN SHARP, District Judge. I. In a scene following a visit by Henry VIII to the home of Sir Thomas More, playwriter Robert Bolt puts the following words into the mouths of his characters: Margaret: Father, that man's bad. MORE: There is no law against that. ROPER: There is! God's law! MORE: Then God can arrest him. ROPER: Sophistication upon sophistication! MORE: No, sheer simplicity. The law, Roper, the law. I know what's legal not what's right. And I'll stick to what's legal. ROPER: Then you set man's law above God's! MORE: No, far below; but let me draw your attention to a fact I'm not God. The currents and eddies of right and wrong, which you find such plain sailing, I can't navigate. I'm no voyager. But in the thickets of law, oh, there I'm a forester. I doubt if there's a man alive who could follow me there, thank God... ALICE: (Exasperated, pointing after Rich) While you talk, he's gone! MORE: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law! ROPER: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law! MORE: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil? ROPER: I'd cut down every law in England to do that! MORE: (Roused and excited) Oh? (Advances on Roper) And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned round on you where would you hide, Roper, the laws being flat? (He leaves *1257 him) This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast man's laws, not God's and if you cut them down and you're just the man to do it d'you really think you would stand upright in the winds that would blow then? (Quietly) Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake. ROPER: I have long suspected this; this is the golden calf; the law's your god. MORE: (Wearily) Oh, Roper, you're a fool, God's my god... (Rather bitterly) But I find him rather too (Very bitterly) subtle... I don't know where he is nor what he wants. ROPER: My God wants service, to the end and unremitting; nothing else! MORE: (Dryly) Are you sure that's God! He sounds like Moloch. But indeed it may be God And whoever hunts for me, Roper, God or Devil, will find me hiding in the thickets of the law! And I'll hide my daughter with me! Not hoist her up the mainmast of your seagoing principles! They put about too nimbly! (Exit More. They all look after him). Pgs. 65-67, A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS A Play in Two Acts, Robert Bolt, Random House, New York, 1960. Linley E. Pearson, Atty. Gen. of Indiana, Indianapolis, for defendants. Childs v. Duckworth, 509 F. Supp. 1254, 1256 (N.D. Ind. 1981) aff'd, 705 F.2d 915 (7th Cir. 1983)

  4. "Meanwhile small- and mid-size firms are getting squeezed and likely will not survive unless they become a boutique firm." I've been a business attorney in small, and now mid-size firm for over 30 years, and for over 30 years legal consultants have been preaching this exact same mantra of impending doom for small and mid-sized firms -- verbatim. This claim apparently helps them gin up merger opportunities from smaller firms who become convinced that they need to become larger overnight. The claim that large corporations are interested in cost-saving and efficiency has likewise been preached for decades, and is likewise bunk. If large corporations had any real interest in saving money they wouldn't use large law firms whose rates are substantially higher than those of high-quality mid-sized firms.

  5. The family is the foundation of all human government. That is the Grand Design. Modern governments throw off this Design and make bureaucratic war against the family, as does Hollywood and cultural elitists such as third wave feminists. Since WWII we have been on a ship of fools that way, with both the elite and government and their social engineering hacks relentlessly attacking the very foundation of social order. And their success? See it in the streets of Fergusson, on the food stamp doles (mostly broken families)and in the above article. Reject the Grand Design for true social function, enter the Glorious State to manage social dysfunction. Our Brave New World will be a prison camp, and we will welcome it as the only way to manage given the anarchy without it.

ADVERTISEMENT