Note: This is a guest post from Harris County Department of Education Board President Angie Chesnut in response to some of the criticisms of the department. The views expressed below are personal and do not represent the Harris County Department of Education Board or the Harris County Department of Education.
Webster defines the word “watchdog” as one that guards against loss, waste, theft, or undesirable practices. Thus, a person or group that purposes to function as watchdogs should give us cause to feel secure and protected. Indeed, some, such as consumer advocates, do protect the public. But what happens when that person or group has an agenda and they have a propensity to bend the facts or break them to achieve that agenda?
Recently, I read an item on the Internet written by the CIA. It stated: “Bourne Cockran wrote to Winston Churchill in 1895 that, “What the people really want to hear is the truth — it is the exciting thing — speak the simple truth.” Twenty years later, Churchill himself wrote, “The truth is incontrovertible; panic may resent it; ignorance may deride it; malice may destroy it, but there it is.”
Many watchdog groups and individuals are self-appointed with defined agendas. While their goal is touted as altruistic, a deeper look at the proclamations, insinuations and accusations of some of these watchdogs reveals a willingness to bend, stretch and even disregard any kernel of truth. Data are often deliberately distorted to favor their line of thinking regardless of fact.
Any data collected for analysis by human beings is subject to the biases and preferred thinking of its analyst. This is true even of statistical data, but more so if the data is subjective in nature. That is, anything that has substance, qualities, attributes, or relations. Essentially, these watchdogs manipulate the analysis and judgments in order to convince or influence the public to think in accordance with the watchdogs’ perspective. In simple terms, they want to control the public viewpoint relative to their goals.
While projecting the image of doing “good for the public”, the goal of the watchdog or group may not be apparent. Often watchdogs are simply fronts for a hidden purpose. The public is oblivious to the real “head of the snake.” This is particularly true of political watchdogs who tend to be zealots pretending to act in the name of Christianity, conservatism, or other puritanically posturing entities. Some even adopt, or are tagged, with labels such as “researcher extraordinaire” and some aptly title their blogs and website as the trash that they espouse. This situation permeates the national landscape at all levels.
Some examples of this type of deceit are found in recent claims by a local blogger and self-appointed tax-watchdog, that ridiculously accused an elected official of returning favors for a donation as small as $250, or a claim that the entire Harris County Department of Education Board of Trustees is corrupt because they had dinner at an elaborate restaurant (did I mention these trustees are unpaid and work a minimum of 15 hours a month for the public?). The “watchdog” comments that the public should not have to pay for her lunch or even a cup of coffee. A holier than thou attitude intended to belittle the public servant. While the general public would most likely applaud the dedication of the public servant who spends countless hours on their behalf and endures many sacrifices in order to serve.
Other examples are couched in “transparency.” A word bantered about as if it is the element that elevates one above any and all ethical characteristic. In truth, some things should not be open to public scrutiny and that is why there are laws, like the Texas Open Meetings Act, that allow for certain discussions to be conducted in private and held in confidence. The “Watchdogs” see this as an opportunity to chastise the public servants, often labeling them with ugly tags that sometimes have political and personal consequences. Some Republican watchdogs are very effective in this endeavor using the insidious tag of RINO (Republican in name only). This is the tag for a person who may vote or express an opinion contrary to that of the watchdog individual/group.
Today, the term “watchdog” has morphed into the more appropriate moniker “attack dog”. These phony “curators of ethics” have so infiltrated the political arena that good, honest, qualified people, who would otherwise seek public office, retreat to the safety of anonymity. Thus, we the public, are left with candidates who seek public office for personal gain and to accomplish their own agendas.
So who is watching the Watchdogs?
“Just because something isn’t a lie does not mean that it isn’t deceptive. A liar knows that he is a liar, but one who speaks mere portions of truth in order to deceive is a craftsman of destruction.”
-Criss Jami, author, poet
Who is responsible to discern the facts? The simple answer is that each of us has a responsibility to learn the truth and demand the truth. If we are to make informed decisions and ask elected officials to do the same, we must take the time to find the truth about important issues. Remember that old saying that knowledge is power? Another adage “power to the people”, can only be claimed when the power is based on the truth. We must stand ready to insist that that power be based on the truth at all levels of government.
Many people feel they don’t have time to research issues themselves. Indeed, it does take time. However, failing to do so can produce serious repercussions. Look at the havoc taking place in our health care system today. Remember the “facts” presented encouraging support of healthcare reform? Today we find the presented facts are not truths at all. Watchdogs knew the information was false, but remained silent or echoed the propaganda, while the liberal media promoted the myths.
Recognition of the above points prompts questions, such as:
1. Who is responsible to discern the facts surrounding controversial issues?
Historically, the media had the responsibility to uncover false information and offer factual news to the public. More often, the media take a position to support the fabricated. That leaves each of us, as individuals, responsible for accepting or objecting the messages offered by watchdogs.
2. Who should confront the watchdog who spreads misinformation, falsehoods, and kernels of truth skewed to fit a specific line of thinking?
Again the media would be the logical purveyors of truth, but we can no longer rely on unbiased, objective facts, or balanced reporting from most media sources. The responsibility falls to those of us intent on discovering the truth and willing to expose watchdogs that skew and spew information to fit their purpose.
3. How does one judge information released by biased media or published by self-serving watchdogs?
First, try to seek the truth from originating sources. For example, when we read about a politician who takes a position on an issue and we are not sure the information makes sense, ask the politician. Most political office holders have staff who can answer such questions and often the politician has a website where he explains his position on specific issues.
4. What can we do to ensure we are not contributing to the hidden agendas and obscure goals of these watchdogs?
Two points to this question – 1. Do not forward or otherwise spread information that is not proven, or that is questionable. 2. Question and seek the truth and when you find it, help others understand the truth.
Watchdogs presenting false or distorted information often urge people to take action, such as contacting officials to voice opposition or favor for a bill or issue. The official may act upon the desires of their constituents. When we, as a public and as individuals, believe and act upon misinformation and harmful propaganda, we make mistakes that can be costly. We may also cause our own elected officials to take action adverse to the best interest of the public. This can have consequences that reach far into the future affecting our children and loved ones.
Below are some specific examples of how one particular watchdog works. This one is appropriately titled, “Texas Trash Talk”.
Her target is a 124 year old entity that helps school districts in Harris County by offering diverse, high quality services at lower costs.
Harris County Department of Education (HCDE)
Here are some of this watchdog’s claims that are skewed or absolutely false:
- Collects $19 Million in property taxes each year ON TOP OF ISD taxes.
HCDE does not collect ISD taxes. HCDE collects .006617 per $100 valuation of property, or an average of $9.93 per year for a house valued at $150,000. HCDE tax is a separate item on the property owners’ tax statement. Taxes represent approximately 20{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} of HCDE’s total budget.
- Does NOT distribute tax funds to Harris County ISDs as required by TEC 18.14.
HCDE is in complete compliance with TEC 18.14, which states that the county governing board shall distribute the moneys collected from the equalization tax. HCDE provides services to school districts that leverage the taxes paid; in other words, for every 20 cents of taxes, HCDE provides an additional 80 cents value in services.
- Has built elaborate and expensive facilities; pays high salaries to 1500 employees
HCDE’s facilities are of average valuation for the areas in which they are located. They are simple buildings and well maintained. Salaries for the 1200 employess at HCDE are reviewed by an outside organization every two to three years to ensure salaries are equitable and reasonable.
- Spends a total annual budget of nearly $100 Million with ZERO zoned students.
ISDs contract with HCDE for services that allow the ISDs to realize significant savings. The students remain zoned to their home schools. Additionally, the $94 Million dollar budget is derived from approximately 20{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} taxes, and the balance from fees for services and grants.
- Uses tax money to pay lobbyists to fight against the taxpayers.
Most government entities engage lobbyists to support them. Following the watchdog’s line of thinking, all government entities authorized to levy taxes use those taxes against the taxpayer.
- Uses tax money as venture capital to start revenue-positive businesses.
The term “venture capital” infers a significant risk associated with a project or venture. HCDE carefully studies new projects that are generally requested by the ISDs and finds ways to save money for the ISDs in providing the requested service. The watchdog deliberately confers the term venture capital on any new program offered by HCDE in an attempt to confuse and deceive the public.
- Serves paying customers all over the United States.
HCDE allows out-of-county entities to access HCDE services for a higher fee and uses the revenues generated to support services for ISDs in Harris County, thus reducing the cost of services to the taxpayers of Harris County.
- Receives “kickback” fees (as high as 33{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986}) on contracts with state/local agencies.
This is a perfect example of the watchdog twisting a kernel of truth to fit her own agenda. The truth is the contract to which she refers pays HCDE a 2{997ab4c1e65fa660c64e6dfea23d436a73c89d6254ad3ae72f887cf583448986} administrative participation fee for job order contracting services.
- Rewards former board members with lucrative “consulting” contracts.
Board members are prohibited from working in any capacity for HCDE until they have been off the board for 1 year. HCDE’s board is elected from all types of businesses and members often possess skills and talents valuable to HCDE. All vendors are selected in accordance with applicable law.
- Allows board members to represent companies selling to HCDE & its co-ops.
Again, this is an example of skewing the truth to fit what the watchdog wants the public to believe. A former board member was a consultant to a large, multi-division company. He was not involved with the division doing business with HCDE or its co-ops. The board member had absolutely nothing to do with the business of HCDE and the vendor. He abstained on any and all votes pertaining to that vendor.
- Property owners pay for multiple competing services with only the bureaucrats coming out ahead
This is a broad and unsubstantiated statement. The intent here is clearly to incite the public to take action against HCDE.
This watchdog blogger exhibits a deliberate willingness to deceive. It takes a great deal of practice and amazing cunning to develop such an art for maligning and prevaricating.
Abraham Lincoln
From the national media to local watchdogs, today’s norm is to apply bias to the facts or to obscure the truth in order to influence a preferred line of thought. We can accept this process and follow like lambs to the slaughter, or we can find and act upon the truth. Only by the latter will we regain our collective ethics and remain independent. The great point is to bring forth the truth.