Bush bashing is so 2001 guys. give it up. I'm no big Bush fan (I lean more towards Nader on environmental and government issues but not social) but he isn't doing as bad a job as the ultra-liberals would like you to beleive. He's doing slightly better than mediocre, and that's a compliment compared to what I thought of Clinton.
The thing is that Bush just doesn't get it on some issues. He might take a step in the right direction, then at the same time, take two steps back.
Take his 'new' education package. It would give $1-2 billion in funds to special education programs to help students with learning disabilities get a good education. Special Education programs in this country have been lacking funds and resources since they were created.
I still feel that this amount of money isn't enough, but that it's a great start nonetheless.
But the thing that really makes me angry is that by giving this money to SPED programs, he wants to hold the students accountable through the same tests that students have to pass in order to recieve a high school diploma.
Bush can talk about 'equality in schools' all he wants, but just putting money into these programs isn't going to allow even 10% of those in SPED programs pass the same tests given to those without learning disabilities.
There are people who can do great things in life with a learning disability, but you NEED a high school diploma to get started. Having a 'Certificate of Attendance' because you can't pass a standardized test isn't right. There are just some people that will never pass these tests, no matter how much money or resources are thrown into these programs.
The other thing that I see coming soon is the return to partisan politics in a MAJOR way. Even when you have Republican party chairman saying,
Yea. Setting a high bar for the "SPED" kids is a bad idea. God forbid someone tell them they can learn. 1-2 B not enough? Now much is? All of the money? Forget the fact that schools are funded on a local level.
[quote]The other thing that I see coming soon is the return to partisan politics in a MAJOR way.<hr></blockquote>
It all ready returned. It returned when Datchle opened his mouth. It returned when the Democrats saw "economic stimulus" and thought "pet spending project".
[quote]God forbid someone tell them they can learn. 1-2 B not enough? Now much is? All of the money? Forget the fact that schools are funded on a local level.<hr></blockquote>
And this is why you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat. There are some people that would NEVER and I repeat NEVER be able to pass the standardized tests that states like MA have with the MCAS, because they just can't take tests. Just because you can't take a test doesn't mean you aren't entitled to a good education, but the way that Bush wants to hold them accountable is appalling to me. Take the thing that a TON of SPED kids can't do (Tests) and make that the standard way to hold them accountable for the information. In my opinion, it would be better to just skip giving them the money and not give them the tests- at least that way, they'll have a chance of doing something with their lives with a high school diploma, because a Certificate of Attendence gets you nowhere in this world.
[quote]It all ready returned. It returned when Datchle opened his mouth. It returned when the Democrats saw "economic stimulus" and thought "pet spending project". <hr></blockquote>
No, this wasn't the MAJOR return to partisan politics. Just because they think they can achieve the same goal in two different ways isn't even close to being on the same level as the MAJOR return I'm talking about.
We're talking about Bush and Co. trying to overturn Roe v. Wade, and other larger issues that will no doubt split the country again. Issues that will have two dramatically different effects on the nation as a whole, and will get people back to the 'Us vs. Them' mentality.
You guys have no idea what WTF you are talking about.
1) Some of these "SPED" kids (BTW, that is a horribly inncorect term from a political standpoint...and that comes form me, a conservative)....aren't really "SPED" at all. Do you think there is only one designation for Special Education? Let me tell, you, I have worked to in two public school districts and these special education students (I am talking about the self-contained clasroom types) are NEVER going to be expected to do what non-self contained kids will. NEVER.
Also, "SPED" refers to a much larger population than just the moderately to severely disabled. It refers to kids with things like 'IEP's"...or Individualized Education Plans. These plans give specific "strategies" for presenting information to students in "their way" so it can be understood. I won't even get into the logistical nightmare this creates for public school teachers with 20-35 kids in a class. It can't be done. I am music teacer with 600 students...probaly 1/5 of which have IEP's. Are you kidding me?
There are several problems with public education is this nation:
1) Everyone is not smart. Period. Some people are destined to work in menial labor jobs...and that is OK. These people may be strong in other multiple intelligence areas, but not those of logic, etc.
2) For the most part, students should be taught to adapt to TEACHERS, not the other way around. If the student fails in today's ed. system, it is often considered the teacher's and or school's fault. Students must be taught to overcome their probems to succeed, especially when they get out into the real world. Obviously, there are exceptions. But not as many as you think.
3) Funding. Most public schools are drastically underfunded...even in moderate income suburban areas. This is the state's fault. We need more federal and state funding, and less local funding. It just isn't right. But, I do not advocate any tax increase to do this. We must cut many of the ridiculous programs the state governments fund and move the money to education.
4) American pop culture. It distracts kids from their jobs..school.
5) Social Promotion and lower standards: It exists bigtime. Many of my IEP kids are in fourth grade and still really can't read...and I am in a fairly decent system. It must stop. We must teach these kids to overcome their weaknesses and succeed...not cater to them.
Basically, the Bush plan is a good one. It will nsure students actually learn. I know for a fact that he did drastically improve education in TX, no matter what BS liberal proaganda numbers you pull out of your ass. I know, I am a teacher and I have seen the results from people that actually work in the system.
I do have some concerns about the plan but I plan to investigate those as well. Yes, we need more money. But what we really need is an attitude adjustment. Students and parents are primarily repsonsible for their success....teachers are the gateway to it. When a student is allowed to have tests read allowed to him for eight years because he can't read, how the F*** is he going to learn how to read? And I am not talking about "disabled" students here...I am talking about kids who are frustrated because they have an average or slightly below average IQ and no motivation to learn. Don't think it happens? Well guess what? IT DOES. You know what else happens? Extra test time, kids that can use calculators when others cannot, and so much more!
If a student is not good at say, visual learning, then avoiding the presentation of material in a visual way is not going to help him or her. It must be presented BOTH ways, say in auditory fashion as well. The fact is that when that student gets out into the work force he very well may HAVE to deal with visual information. No one is going to read things to him. He has to be taught that it doesn't matter if he doesn't like a subject, he is going to have to do well anyway. He is going to have to be taught that he may have to spend 3 times more study time than others to get the same results.
But kids today are not taught this. Except in my clasroom and a few others across the nation. And whatever you say, I KNOW I am doing the right thing. I KNOW I am helping that kid more than the coddlers out there.
But, to sum up, the Bush plan sounds decent to me from a teacher's viewpoint. We will see.
[quote]But, to sum up, the Bush plan sounds decent to me from a teacher's viewpoint. We will see.<hr></blockquote>
I strongly disagree, and I'm coming from a position where people in my family have learning disabilities, and where my mother is a teacher and a former director of SPED in a public school system.
Yes, there are different ways to teach, and yes not all students are at the point where it would be impossible for them to pass a standardized test, but it is WRONG to think that throwing money into SPED programs is going to 'magically' allow all of the students in these programs to pass a standardized test. It just won't happen.
Accountability through testing is wrong. Plain and simple. These plans do nothing more than reform public education to teaching to the test. If you have tests that people have to pass to earn their high school diploma, even if they can pass the CLASSES, there will always be students that can't pass, no matter what the circumstances.
<strong>And this is why you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat. There are some people that would NEVER and I repeat NEVER be able to pass the standardized tests that states like MA have with the MCAS, because they just can't take tests. Just because you can't take a test doesn't mean you aren't entitled to a good education, but the way that Bush wants to hold them accountable is appalling to me. Take the thing that a TON of SPED kids can't do (Tests) and make that the standard way to hold them accountable for the information. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh I know that's so horrible. Asking SPED kids to take a test to gauge how much they've learned is so unfair. Also could explain how someone who "can't" take a test gets a "good education".
Fran you like the rest of the libs look down your nose at these SPED kids. You think they can't do it so you don't even want to try. Give the retards a chance. Hold them to a high standard. Some of them may not make it. Many will be better off because something was expected of them.
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
In my opinion, it would be better to just skip giving them the money and not give them the tests- at least that way, they'll have a chance of doing something with their lives with a high school diploma, because a <strong>Certificate of Attendence gets you nowhere in this world.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But that's what they get under your "no tests" plan. Without testing there's no way to know what they've learned or if the teacher is doing any type of a job. Many of those SPED classes are nothing more than babysiting 101.
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>No, this wasn't the MAJOR return to partisan politics. Just because they think they can achieve the same goal in two different ways isn't even close to being on the same level as the MAJOR return I'm talking about.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay how about Datchle not allowing Bush nominees to come to a floor vote. Some have passed committee. Some can't get a date with the committee. All because it's some kind of pay back time for Datchle.
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>We're talking about Bush and Co. trying to overturn Roe v. Wade, and other larger issues that will no doubt split the country again. Issues that will have two dramatically different effects on the nation as a whole, and will get people back to the 'Us vs. Them' mentality.</strong><hr></blockquote>
"split the country again"? WTF are you talking about? I guess when the issue goes your way they should leave it alone so as not to "split the country again". But when the issue does not go your way Bush needs to flip because the country is split? Like most liberals you're looking at the world through your own prism. Hey Fran? There are points of views out there.
I strongly disagree, and I'm coming from a position where people in my family have learning disabilities, and where my mother is a teacher and a former director of SPED in a public school system.
Yes, there are different ways to teach, and yes not all students are at the point where it would be impossible for them to pass a standardized test, but it is WRONG to think that throwing money into SPED programs is going to 'magically' allow all of the students in these programs to pass a standardized test. It just won't happen.
Accountability through testing is wrong. Plain and simple. These plans do nothing more than reform public education to teaching to the test. If you have tests that people have to pass to earn their high school diploma, even if they can pass the CLASSES, there will always be students that can't pass, no matter what the circumstances.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OMG!
[quote]....but it is WRONG to think that throwing money into SPED programs is going to 'magically' allow all of the students in these programs to pass a standardized test. It just won't happen. <hr></blockquote>
---What? Which party is known for just throwing money at problems here, Fran? The Republicans? RIGHT! The Democrats have been throwing money at education for years and it is getting worse, not better. That is Bush's whole point....money must be tied to performance. The man WANTS more money....but only when he sees it is beeing used appropriately....that is what getting an MBA teaches you I imagine.
[quote] Accountability through testing is wrong. Plain and simple. <hr></blockquote>
---OMFG!!!!! How will you measure performance, with a yard stick? This is how almost ALL grades are calculated in this nation, K-12 and beyond. Of course there are other methods but this is the primary one. Are you telling me that I should have to take teacher certification exams but my students shouldn't have to take tests? What?
[quote] These plans do nothing more than reform public education to teaching to the test. <hr></blockquote>
---Well, Fran, we can actually use Mr. Bush's own words to support this one. "Some say this will create a situation in which we teach to the test. But, if the test [meets its objective of measuring the learning of clearly defined concepts], then that is the whole idea".
I agree we need to be careful about what is on these tests. That is the thing. See below...
[quote] If you have tests that people have to pass to earn their high school diploma, even if they can pass the CLASSES, there will always be students that can't pass, no matter what the circumstances <hr></blockquote>
Well, this is the whole point. What are schools teaching? What are students learning? We will finally have clearly defined national benchmarks on basic concepts that every student should know. I said EVERY student, Fran. If the student can't learn and remember the material (again, assuming that they are not severly disabled) then guess what? NO DILPMOA FOR HE/SHE!!!! Passing a class without learning is quite possible...you know that. A diploma is supposed to be an indicator that someone has learned, not just gotten grades. And believe me, there is a difference.
You are a bleeding heart! Not everyone is meant to have a HS diploma. If we implement this system, not everyone will get one. Those who cannot pass the test will get a certificate of attendance. They will also be able to show that they passed classes, but, they were unable to pass the test for any number of reasons. Guess what, Fran? If one can't pass tests for whatever reason in school he/she is not going to be able to do it in the workforce either!
This is the whole problem. We socially promote students for their own self-esteem and because "they worked so hard" That is total bullshit. Everyone has different gifts and talents and not everyone is created equal. Lots of high school grads cannot read and write and we have to put a stop to that. Let them leave school but don't give them a diploma.
While we are at it, why don't we say that if one cannot pass tests in college, she/he should still get a diploma? After all, it is that person's RIGHT to have an education....
We do need to monitor what is on the test. That is the problem and I'll agree that this needs to be done well for this program to be effective. I have taken teacher certification tests that, quite frankly, are a joke. So, this is something that must be addressed.
As far as everyone having a right to an education, well in K-12 they DO. But, they don't have a right to a piece of paper that says "I learned.....I did the work and I overcame and dealt with my own limitations and talents"....when that person didn't actually do those things. What distinguishes that person from someone who actually DID those things?
Comments
Take his 'new' education package. It would give $1-2 billion in funds to special education programs to help students with learning disabilities get a good education. Special Education programs in this country have been lacking funds and resources since they were created.
I still feel that this amount of money isn't enough, but that it's a great start nonetheless.
But the thing that really makes me angry is that by giving this money to SPED programs, he wants to hold the students accountable through the same tests that students have to pass in order to recieve a high school diploma.
Bush can talk about 'equality in schools' all he wants, but just putting money into these programs isn't going to allow even 10% of those in SPED programs pass the same tests given to those without learning disabilities.
There are people who can do great things in life with a learning disability, but you NEED a high school diploma to get started. Having a 'Certificate of Attendance' because you can't pass a standardized test isn't right. There are just some people that will never pass these tests, no matter how much money or resources are thrown into these programs.
The other thing that I see coming soon is the return to partisan politics in a MAJOR way. Even when you have Republican party chairman saying,
[quote]Americans don't want partisan attacks.<hr></blockquote>
you have Bush coming out with statements that would leave most to believe that they will try and overturn Roe v Wade within months.
<a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020118-10.html"; target="_blank">http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020118-10.html</a>;
This is why I hardly ever see 'eye to eye' with Bush.
This is what I'm afraid of. But some people on this board would love nothing more than to drive the 2 parties further apart. A shame really.
[quote]The other thing that I see coming soon is the return to partisan politics in a MAJOR way.<hr></blockquote>
It all ready returned. It returned when Datchle opened his mouth. It returned when the Democrats saw "economic stimulus" and thought "pet spending project".
And this is why you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat.
[quote]It all ready returned. It returned when Datchle opened his mouth. It returned when the Democrats saw "economic stimulus" and thought "pet spending project". <hr></blockquote>
No, this wasn't the MAJOR return to partisan politics. Just because they think they can achieve the same goal in two different ways isn't even close to being on the same level as the MAJOR return I'm talking about.
We're talking about Bush and Co. trying to overturn Roe v. Wade, and other larger issues that will no doubt split the country again. Issues that will have two dramatically different effects on the nation as a whole, and will get people back to the 'Us vs. Them' mentality.
1) Some of these "SPED" kids (BTW, that is a horribly inncorect term from a political standpoint...and that comes form me, a conservative)....aren't really "SPED" at all. Do you think there is only one designation for Special Education? Let me tell, you, I have worked to in two public school districts and these special education students (I am talking about the self-contained clasroom types) are NEVER going to be expected to do what non-self contained kids will. NEVER.
Also, "SPED" refers to a much larger population than just the moderately to severely disabled. It refers to kids with things like 'IEP's"...or Individualized Education Plans. These plans give specific "strategies" for presenting information to students in "their way" so it can be understood. I won't even get into the logistical nightmare this creates for public school teachers with 20-35 kids in a class. It can't be done. I am music teacer with 600 students...probaly 1/5 of which have IEP's. Are you kidding me?
There are several problems with public education is this nation:
1) Everyone is not smart. Period. Some people are destined to work in menial labor jobs...and that is OK. These people may be strong in other multiple intelligence areas, but not those of logic, etc.
2) For the most part, students should be taught to adapt to TEACHERS, not the other way around. If the student fails in today's ed. system, it is often considered the teacher's and or school's fault. Students must be taught to overcome their probems to succeed, especially when they get out into the real world. Obviously, there are exceptions. But not as many as you think.
3) Funding. Most public schools are drastically underfunded...even in moderate income suburban areas. This is the state's fault. We need more federal and state funding, and less local funding. It just isn't right. But, I do not advocate any tax increase to do this. We must cut many of the ridiculous programs the state governments fund and move the money to education.
4) American pop culture. It distracts kids from their jobs..school.
5) Social Promotion and lower standards: It exists bigtime. Many of my IEP kids are in fourth grade and still really can't read...and I am in a fairly decent system. It must stop. We must teach these kids to overcome their weaknesses and succeed...not cater to them.
Basically, the Bush plan is a good one. It will nsure students actually learn. I know for a fact that he did drastically improve education in TX, no matter what BS liberal proaganda numbers you pull out of your ass. I know, I am a teacher and I have seen the results from people that actually work in the system.
I do have some concerns about the plan but I plan to investigate those as well. Yes, we need more money. But what we really need is an attitude adjustment. Students and parents are primarily repsonsible for their success....teachers are the gateway to it. When a student is allowed to have tests read allowed to him for eight years because he can't read, how the F*** is he going to learn how to read? And I am not talking about "disabled" students here...I am talking about kids who are frustrated because they have an average or slightly below average IQ and no motivation to learn. Don't think it happens? Well guess what? IT DOES. You know what else happens? Extra test time, kids that can use calculators when others cannot, and so much more!
If a student is not good at say, visual learning, then avoiding the presentation of material in a visual way is not going to help him or her. It must be presented BOTH ways, say in auditory fashion as well. The fact is that when that student gets out into the work force he very well may HAVE to deal with visual information. No one is going to read things to him. He has to be taught that it doesn't matter if he doesn't like a subject, he is going to have to do well anyway. He is going to have to be taught that he may have to spend 3 times more study time than others to get the same results.
But kids today are not taught this. Except in my clasroom and a few others across the nation. And whatever you say, I KNOW I am doing the right thing. I KNOW I am helping that kid more than the coddlers out there.
But, to sum up, the Bush plan sounds decent to me from a teacher's viewpoint. We will see.
[ 01-20-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
I strongly disagree, and I'm coming from a position where people in my family have learning disabilities, and where my mother is a teacher and a former director of SPED in a public school system.
Yes, there are different ways to teach, and yes not all students are at the point where it would be impossible for them to pass a standardized test, but it is WRONG to think that throwing money into SPED programs is going to 'magically' allow all of the students in these programs to pass a standardized test. It just won't happen.
Accountability through testing is wrong. Plain and simple. These plans do nothing more than reform public education to teaching to the test. If you have tests that people have to pass to earn their high school diploma, even if they can pass the CLASSES, there will always be students that can't pass, no matter what the circumstances.
<strong>And this is why you're a Republican and I'm a Democrat. There are some people that would NEVER and I repeat NEVER be able to pass the standardized tests that states like MA have with the MCAS, because they just can't take tests. Just because you can't take a test doesn't mean you aren't entitled to a good education, but the way that Bush wants to hold them accountable is appalling to me. Take the thing that a TON of SPED kids can't do (Tests) and make that the standard way to hold them accountable for the information. </strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh I know that's so horrible. Asking SPED kids to take a test to gauge how much they've learned is so unfair. Also could explain how someone who "can't" take a test gets a "good education".
Fran you like the rest of the libs look down your nose at these SPED kids. You think they can't do it so you don't even want to try. Give the retards a chance. Hold them to a high standard. Some of them may not make it. Many will be better off because something was expected of them.
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
In my opinion, it would be better to just skip giving them the money and not give them the tests- at least that way, they'll have a chance of doing something with their lives with a high school diploma, because a <strong>Certificate of Attendence gets you nowhere in this world.</strong><hr></blockquote>
But that's what they get under your "no tests" plan. Without testing there's no way to know what they've learned or if the teacher is doing any type of a job. Many of those SPED classes are nothing more than babysiting 101.
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>No, this wasn't the MAJOR return to partisan politics. Just because they think they can achieve the same goal in two different ways isn't even close to being on the same level as the MAJOR return I'm talking about.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Okay how about Datchle not allowing Bush nominees to come to a floor vote. Some have passed committee. Some can't get a date with the committee. All because it's some kind of pay back time for Datchle.
[quote]Originally posted by Fran441:
<strong>We're talking about Bush and Co. trying to overturn Roe v. Wade, and other larger issues that will no doubt split the country again. Issues that will have two dramatically different effects on the nation as a whole, and will get people back to the 'Us vs. Them' mentality.</strong><hr></blockquote>
"split the country again"? WTF are you talking about? I guess when the issue goes your way they should leave it alone so as not to "split the country again". But when the issue does not go your way Bush needs to flip because the country is split? Like most liberals you're looking at the world through your own prism. Hey Fran? There are points of views out there.
Also wtf has Bush done to over turn RvW?
[ 01-20-2002: Message edited by: Scott H. ]</p>
<strong>
I strongly disagree, and I'm coming from a position where people in my family have learning disabilities, and where my mother is a teacher and a former director of SPED in a public school system.
Yes, there are different ways to teach, and yes not all students are at the point where it would be impossible for them to pass a standardized test, but it is WRONG to think that throwing money into SPED programs is going to 'magically' allow all of the students in these programs to pass a standardized test. It just won't happen.
Accountability through testing is wrong. Plain and simple. These plans do nothing more than reform public education to teaching to the test. If you have tests that people have to pass to earn their high school diploma, even if they can pass the CLASSES, there will always be students that can't pass, no matter what the circumstances.</strong><hr></blockquote>
OMG!
[quote]....but it is WRONG to think that throwing money into SPED programs is going to 'magically' allow all of the students in these programs to pass a standardized test. It just won't happen. <hr></blockquote>
---What? Which party is known for just throwing money at problems here, Fran? The Republicans? RIGHT! The Democrats have been throwing money at education for years and it is getting worse, not better. That is Bush's whole point....money must be tied to performance. The man WANTS more money....but only when he sees it is beeing used appropriately....that is what getting an MBA teaches you I imagine.
[quote] Accountability through testing is wrong. Plain and simple. <hr></blockquote>
---OMFG!!!!! How will you measure performance, with a yard stick? This is how almost ALL grades are calculated in this nation, K-12 and beyond. Of course there are other methods but this is the primary one. Are you telling me that I should have to take teacher certification exams but my students shouldn't have to take tests? What?
[quote] These plans do nothing more than reform public education to teaching to the test. <hr></blockquote>
---Well, Fran, we can actually use Mr. Bush's own words to support this one. "Some say this will create a situation in which we teach to the test. But, if the test [meets its objective of measuring the learning of clearly defined concepts], then that is the whole idea".
I agree we need to be careful about what is on these tests. That is the thing. See below...
[quote] If you have tests that people have to pass to earn their high school diploma, even if they can pass the CLASSES, there will always be students that can't pass, no matter what the circumstances <hr></blockquote>
Well, this is the whole point. What are schools teaching? What are students learning? We will finally have clearly defined national benchmarks on basic concepts that every student should know. I said EVERY student, Fran. If the student can't learn and remember the material (again, assuming that they are not severly disabled) then guess what? NO DILPMOA FOR HE/SHE!!!! Passing a class without learning is quite possible...you know that. A diploma is supposed to be an indicator that someone has learned, not just gotten grades. And believe me, there is a difference.
You are a bleeding heart! Not everyone is meant to have a HS diploma. If we implement this system, not everyone will get one. Those who cannot pass the test will get a certificate of attendance. They will also be able to show that they passed classes, but, they were unable to pass the test for any number of reasons. Guess what, Fran? If one can't pass tests for whatever reason in school he/she is not going to be able to do it in the workforce either!
This is the whole problem. We socially promote students for their own self-esteem and because "they worked so hard" That is total bullshit. Everyone has different gifts and talents and not everyone is created equal. Lots of high school grads cannot read and write and we have to put a stop to that. Let them leave school but don't give them a diploma.
While we are at it, why don't we say that if one cannot pass tests in college, she/he should still get a diploma? After all, it is that person's RIGHT to have an education....
We do need to monitor what is on the test. That is the problem and I'll agree that this needs to be done well for this program to be effective. I have taken teacher certification tests that, quite frankly, are a joke. So, this is something that must be addressed.
As far as everyone having a right to an education, well in K-12 they DO. But, they don't have a right to a piece of paper that says "I learned.....I did the work and I overcame and dealt with my own limitations and talents"....when that person didn't actually do those things. What distinguishes that person from someone who actually DID those things?
You are a fool.
[ 01-20-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]
[ 01-20-2002: Message edited by: SDW2001 ]</p>
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/23/business/23EXEM.html"; target="_blank">Exemption Won in 1997 Set Stage for Enron Woes</a>